Wage & Hour

An employee who complains to the DLSE and seeks relief from the Labor Commissioner in a Berman hearing is entitled to back wages for the limitations period calculated backwards from the date the employee files an initial report or claim with the DLSE, not from the later date of filing a formal complaint.  Though it doesn't say so expressly, Lab.… Read More

Agreeing with Magadia v. Wal-Mart Associates, Inc. (9th Cir. 2021) 999 F.3d 668, this decision holds that the employer did not violate Lab. Code 226(a)(9) by not stating a wage rate or hours worked for a true-up of overtime pay for the preceding month's work based on the flat rate bonus paid that month.  The statute requires wage statements to… Read More

This decision holds that an employer did not have to pay job applicants for the time and expense of taking drug tests as a precondition for employment.  The employer's control over the drug tests was not control over the performance of work and so didn't make the applicants employees.  Nor was the drug test a condition subsequent to employment.  Instead,… Read More

The extra hour's penalty pay that an employer must pay a worker who has been denied a meal break is wages, and so failure to pay the hour's wage triggers the additional waiting time and insufficient wage statement penalties under Lab. Code 203 and 226.  The employee is entitled to 7% prejudgment interest on the hour's penalty wages. Read More

Following Usher v. White (2021) 64 Cal.App.5th 883, this decision holds that, under Lab. Code 558.1, an owner, officer, director, or managing agent of the employer may be held liable for the employer's violation of an IWC wage order or of certain wage and hour sections of the Labor Code if the individual defendant had some oversight of the employer's… Read More

The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying class certification in this wage and hour case.  Insofar as plaintiff claimed that the employer's rounding of hours worked was illegal, the trial court properly found that noncommon issues predominated because it had no single rounding policy but left matters up to managers at its different locations.  Plaintiff's theory that… Read More

A volunteer working for a charitable organization without the expectation of payment for his work is not an employee for purposes of state wage and hour laws.  The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying certification of an alleged class of all workers for the defendant charity who did not receive pay for their work.  There was a… Read More

Affirming an order denying an employer's motion to compel arbitration of the worker's wage and hour, retaliation and discrimination in employment claims, this decision holds the agreement was at least minimally procedurally unconscionable as it was an adhesion contract.  It also holds two provisions substantively unconscionable, one requiring any claims to be brought within a year of discovery (despite statutes… Read More

Before filing a PAGA suit, a plaintiff must send a pre-suit notice to the Labor and Workforce Development Agency and the employer describing the facts and theories to support the alleged violation. Lab. Code 2699.3.  This decision holds that at least when the notice reveals a violation that is likely to have affected more workers than the individual prospective plaintiff… Read More

The plaintiff's alleged failure to give adequate pre-suit notice to the Labor and Workforce Development Agency and the employer before filing a PAGA suit is an affirmative defense which the employer waives either by not pleading it in the answer or by, even if so pleaded, not pursuing it as a defense by pretrial motion or at trial. Read More