Litigating California Wage & Hour and Labor Code Class Actions
Litigating California Wage & Hour and Labor Code Class Actions
Litigating California Wage & Hour and Labor Code Class Actions
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
associated statutory penalties. 1 The following discussion addresses some of the issues that have<br />
arisen concerning the misclassification of employees under the various available exemptions.<br />
A. Overview of State Overtime Law<br />
Before January 1, 2000, the <strong>California</strong> Industrial Welfare Commission (“IWC”) was the body<br />
authorized by statute to set overtime requirements. It acted in a quasi-legislative capacity,<br />
promulgating a series of “<strong>Wage</strong> Orders” that set rules for wages, hours, <strong>and</strong> working<br />
conditions that differed slightly from one industry to another. The IWC eliminated daily<br />
overtime from the <strong>Wage</strong> Orders in 1997. 2 In response, after Gray Davis became governor<br />
in 1998, the Legislature passed AB 60 which amended the <strong>Labor</strong> <strong>Code</strong> to provide for daily<br />
overtime <strong>and</strong> to enshrine various employee protections into the <strong>Labor</strong> <strong>Code</strong> so that they<br />
could not be altered by the IWC. 3 The <strong>Wage</strong> Orders are still in effect, but the IWC is<br />
precluded from promulgating rules within the <strong>Wage</strong> Orders that are inconsistent with the<br />
<strong>Labor</strong> <strong>Code</strong> itself. 4<br />
Under <strong>Labor</strong> <strong>Code</strong> Section 510, employees are entitled to one <strong>and</strong> one-half times their<br />
regular rate when they work more than eight hours in a single day, more than forty hours in<br />
a workweek, or during the first eight hours of the seventh straight day of a single<br />
workweek. 5 Employees are entitled to double time when they work more than twelve hours<br />
in a single day or beyond the eighth hour of the seventh straight day of a single workweek.<br />
These rules apply to non-exempt employees in <strong>California</strong> in every industry. 6 These rules<br />
1<br />
2<br />
3<br />
4<br />
5<br />
6<br />
Punitive damages are not recoverable when liability is premised solely on <strong>Labor</strong> <strong>Code</strong> wage <strong>and</strong> hour violations.<br />
Brewer v. Premier Golf Properties, 168 Cal. App. 4th 1243, 1252 (2008).<br />
Collins v. Overnite Transp. Co., 105 Cal. App. 4th 171, 176 (2003).<br />
See, e.g., Lab. <strong>Code</strong> § 510 (daily overtime requirement) <strong>and</strong> Lab. <strong>Code</strong> § 226.7 (meal <strong>and</strong> rest period requirements).<br />
Collins, 105 Cal. App. 4th at 178-80 (<strong>Wage</strong> Orders <strong>and</strong> <strong>Labor</strong> <strong>Code</strong> should be read together to underst<strong>and</strong> scope of<br />
wage <strong>and</strong> hour regulation of <strong>California</strong> employees).<br />
Note that employers may assign employees to work schedules that differ from company’s designated<br />
workweek/workday <strong>and</strong> base overtime calculations on the designated workweek/workday as long as the schedule is not<br />
established for the purpose of evading lawful overtime requirements. Seymore v. Metson Marine, 194 Cal.App. 4th 361<br />
(2011).<br />
However, employees <strong>and</strong> employers may specifically agree in advance to a “specific mutual wage agreement” that<br />
provides a guaranteed salary covering both base hours <strong>and</strong> a specific number of overtime hours. The required<br />
elements of such an agreement are: “(1) the days that [employee] would work each week; (2) the number of hours<br />
[employee] would work each day; (3) that [employee] would be paid a guaranteed salary of a specific amount; (4) that<br />
[employee] was told the basic hourly rate upon which his salary was based; (5) that [employee] was told his salary<br />
covered both his regular <strong>and</strong> overtime hours; <strong>and</strong> (6) the agreement must have been reached before the work was<br />
performed.” Archiega v. Dolores Press, Inc., 192 Cal. App. 4th 567, 571 (2011) quoting Ghory v. Al-Lanham, 209 Cal.<br />
App. 3d 1487, 1491 (1989).<br />
Seyfarth Shaw LLP | www.seyfarth.com <strong>Litigating</strong> <strong>California</strong> <strong>Wage</strong> & <strong>Hour</strong> <strong>Class</strong> <strong>Actions</strong> (12th Edition) 5