As an employee-friendly state, California has wide-ranging regulations aimed to protect employees and to curtail employers’ excesses. One of such laws is California labor law breaks. The law provides most California employees with the legal rights to meal and lunch breaks as well as one or more mini-break periods. The reason is to enable employees re-energize and reset during their work shifts as well as to reduce safety-related incidents in many industries.

In this post, we are going to consider the California labor law breaks, California’s meal and rest period requirements, your right to breaks, limitations, and what to do if your break rights are ever violated.

WHAT ARE BREAK PERIODS?

Break periods are time set aside exclusively for employees. Under the California Labor Code Section 512, California employers are required to give their employees some minutes or hours of uninterrupted breaks. During these break periods, the law prohibits employers from encumbering employees with work activities. If an employee is still required to engage in work or work-related activities during any break periods, it shows that the employer has not relieved the employee from work duty for the particular break. Failure of an employer to give an employee adequate breaks can result in steep fines from the state.

CALIFORNIA BREAK REQUIREMENTS (NON-EXEMPT EMPLOYEES)

Generally, non-exempt employees are entitled to the following rest breaks and meal breaks for the corresponding working hours:

Fig 1.

Fig. 2

REST BREAK REQUIREMENTS (NON-EXEMPT EMPLOYEES)

The California labor law breaks provision requires that non-exempt employees should take rest breaks during their work shifts, and the employers must adhere to providing the same. Below are some requirements that come with rest breaks:

• Employers must give employees uninterrupted 10 minutes rest break for every four hours of work or fraction thereof
• Employers must relieve their employees of all duties during the rest break
• Rest breaks are work time and as such must be paid
• The break should be taken near the end of the employee’s work period.

The California labor law breaks provision applies uniformly to industries under 15 Orders, including the motion picture industry. But there is an exemption to professional actors, and personal attendants under the Household employment Order. Under all Orders, except for private household employment, the DLSE may grant an exception to the rest break law upon an employer’s application based on unjustified hardship, provided such an exception would not significantly affect the comfort and welfare of their employees.

MEAL BREAK REQUIREMENTS (NONEXEMPT EMPLOYEES)

Just like rest breaks, the California labor law Breaks provision also provides employers with some restrictions when it comes to meal breaks. Below are some requirements that come with lawful meal breaks.

• Employers must provide employees with 30 minutes uninterrupted, unpaid meal break after every 5 hours of work
• Relinquish control of the employee’s activities
• Employees must be relieved of all duties;
• Employers do not have to ensure employees take those breaks.
• Employees may decide to have their meal break onsite or leave the premise to use their break as they wish.
• Employees must take an additional meal break especially for long shifts

Employers cannot:

• Impede or discourage their workers from taking meal breaks anywhere;
• create inducement towards skipping meal breaks;
• create a culture that encourages skipping meal breaks

Although the 30-minute meal break is unpaid, employees can agree with their employer to an on-call meal break, which counts as time worked, and payable – details of this later.

 WAIVER PROVISIONS TO MEAL BREAKS

The California labor law allows the 30-minute meal period to be waived by mutual consent of both the employee and the employer, under the following circumstances:

• When an employee’s work period for a workday does not exceed six hours. In this case, neither the employer nor the employee can be forced to waive the meal break. For instance, if the employer wants to waive the meal break, but the employee does not, then the meal break can’t be waived.
• If the total number of hours worked by the employee does not exceed 12 hours, then the second meal break may be waived subject to mutual consent of the employee and the employer and employee provided that the first meal period was not waived

NOTE: Neither the California Labor law breaks provision, nor the Wage Orders require that either of these waivers be in writing. But such an agreement should be put in writing whenever possible.

ON-DUTY MEAL BREAK AGREEMENT

Generally, the California labor law restricts an employer from allowing their employees to continue working or be “on-duty” during meal breaks. Unless the employee is relieved of all work duty during the entire meal break and is free to leave the work premises, the meal break is considered “on duty.” It is legally the same as denying the workers their meal breaks, and the employer has to compensate the employee for the meal break at the worker’s regular wage.

However, some exemptions exist where an “on duty” meal break period are legally permitted. Whether or not the nature of the job prevents a worker from being relieved of all work duty can be very difficult to justify. An employee and an employer may not agree to an “on-duty” meal break except, based on objective reasons, where:

1. The employee works over six hours, and the nature of the work does not allow the employee to be relieved of all duty, e.g. a lone security guard positioned at a remote site
2. There is a written agreement between the employee and the employer, and on-the-job meal is agreed to. The written agreement must indicate that the employee may withdraw the agreement at any time.

To implement on-duty meal break, an employer should first consult a qualified employment counsel for guidance.

LIMITATIONS ON BREAKS

The California Industrial Welfare Commission (CIWC) allows employers to make their workers stay on-premise during a meal break. In this case, the meal break would be considered to be paid time. That implies that the employer must compensate the workers at their regular pay rate for the length of the break. Likewise, employers may require their workers to be onsite during rest breaks. However, the employer cannot mandate the employee to work during the rest break. Employers also have the right to logically limit the amount of time their workers take to use the restroom outside of the required breaks, and by no means should an employee extend breaks using the restroom at the end of the break.

WHAT IF EMPLOYEES ARE DENIED THEIR RIGHTFUL CALIFORNIA BREAKS?

Your California employer is not doing any favor by letting you take a rest break or meal break. They are strictly required to do so. Consider this: if an employee is eating during his meal break and the employer or his boss calls him to review or do anything work-related. If the employee puts his food aside and works even for just a minute, then the employer has just denied the employee their meal break right because the employee’s break was interrupted by work activity.

If your employer fails to provide proper breaks, whether by (i) reducing your break time (ii) preventing you from taking a break (iii) Pressuring you to work through some or all of your break period or (iv) not providing any breaks at all, then you are entitled to an additional hour of pay at your normal hourly rate. This would be for each day you did not get a proper break.

For instance, if an employer denied an employee a proper rest break and meal break, then the employer owes the employee two additional hours of pay for that day. And if the employee is denied a proper break for an entire year, say 250 workdays, then the employee may be entitled to damages equal to 250 workdays multiply by employee wage rate for the breaks employee was denied. So if an employee is making $15/hour and the employee is denied meal break, then that would be $3,750 in extra wages that the employer owed the employee.

There are technicalities and nuances to California’s labor law breaks provisions, which is why it is advised that you consult a California employment attorney if you think your employer has violated your rights.

WHAT IF EMPLOYEE SKIPS THEIR BREAK?

If the employer provides meal break to an employee, but the employee willingly and voluntarily decides to skip the meal and work during the break period or eat while working, the employer would not owe employee any additional wages or penalties. The California labor law breaks only require them to provide those break times. Whatever the employee does during the break is up to the employee. If, on the other hand, the employee is pressured to skip a break, or the employee feels they will be criticized or denied perks or advancement if they take their full breaks, or if the employee has to skip breaks to meet work deadlines, then the employer might still be penalized. You can talk to a California employee rights attorney to discuss your situation.

EXEMPTIONS TO THE CALIFORNIA LABOR LAW BREAKS

There are exceptions to the rules regarding California labor law Breaks provision. Pursuant to Labor Code sections 512 and 226.7, and Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Orders 11 and 12, salaried workers who work in some professions (like motion picture or broadcasting industries, commercial drivers, construction workers, private security officers, etc) and meet some minimum earning conditions are exempted from most of the labor laws that apply to non-exempt employees. Further, employees working under a collective bargaining agreement may not be subject to the rules regarding meal periods.

For an employee to be classified as exempt;

• They must have spent more than half of their time doing managerial, intellectual, and creative works.
• Their primary duties must be executive, administrative, or professional tasks.
• They must regularly make decisions and exercise independent judgment.
• They must earn a monthly salary no less than twice the California minimum wage.

Even though most exempt employees are not qualified for rest breaks, they are still entitled to meal breaks. An employment attorney can examine your particular situation further to see if you qualify for rest and meal breaks.

CALIFORNIA BREAKS PENALTIES

Break periods are counted as hours worked. For no reason should an employer deduct pay from the time taken for an authorized break period. If an employer denies their employee a proper meal or rest breaks, the employee is qualified to receive extra wages under California labor law breaks provision.

To pursue the claim, the employer can:

• Try things on their own (without a lawyer’s help) and ask their employer for those extra wages. If the employer is one of those who wants to do the right thing, then congratulations! The employee should let the employer know of the extra wages owed, and if it turns out valid, they will pay the employee in full with little hassle. But if the employer refused to pay, then the employee may have to:
• File a complaint in court;
• File a wage claim with the Labor Commissioner or DLSE
• Contact an employee rights lawyer and get help in trying to persuade the employer to pay the employee what they are owed and to help the employee decide on and apply the best alternatives if the employer refuses.

CALIFORNIA LABOR LAW BREAKS: WHAT CAN EMPLOYER DO?

Break laws can be very tricky (as they apply differently to businesses and industries), and they can create huge financial issues for businesses that fail to comply with the labor law breaks provision. It is, therefore, essential for businesses to be careful when implementing proper break policies as required by the California labor commission. With the increasing number of court cases targeting employers’ rest and meal break practices, employers are advised to carefully review the employer’s policies to be sure they are getting their proper rest and meal breaks. If you need help with employment law, contact United Employees Law Group to learn the exact employment laws apply to your business.

FINAL THOUGHT

If you have been denied your proper meal or rest break, or you think your employer is denying you the same, do not hesitate to contact the expert employment attorneys at United Employees Law Group today. With years of successful experience, we represent workers who have been denied their break periods or otherwise maltreated by their employer throughout California. Schedule an appointment with us to evaluate your case, determine the best option for your recovery, and help you implement that option. Do not forget that filing certain claims or complaints has strict deadlines. Contact United Employees Law Group today to ensure your rights are protected.

Photo credit: sebboy12/shutterstock.com

The post CALIFORNIA LABOR LAW BREAKS: WHAT YOU SHOULD KNOW appeared first on UELG.

California has notoriously strict wage and hour laws for employers; one particular complicated area is related to California lunch break law. Lunch break compliance continues to be the source of litigation for California employers. Generally, California labor law requires that employers provide lunch breaks for their employees and that they are paid for some of this time. To comply with the rules, employers need to understand California break laws, do everything possible to communicate the legal requirements to their employees as well as provide them with opportunities to take lunch and rest breaks. Otherwise, they may find themselves exposed to considerable amounts of litigation and financial risk from legal penalties. This post talks about the lunch requirements that California employers must meet.

LUNCH BREAKS

Lunch breaks are compulsory breaks that an employee must take at some time every day in their workplace. Many employers in California provide lunch break as a matter of custom and policy, maybe because they recognize the fact that a worker who is tired and hungry may not be productive and pleasant to co-workers and customers. The time to take meal breaks in California can vary among businesses, but there are specific lunch break laws in California that employers and employees must adhere to a daily basis.

Subject to California wage and hour law, employers are required to provide or permit lunch breaks to workers who work a minimum number of hours without any interruptions. The employers will satisfy their legal obligations to offer a lunch break to their employers if they:

• Do not have control over the activities of their employees
• Do not discourage or obstruct their employees from going for a lunch break.
• Relieve their workers of all duty
• Give their employees a levelheaded opportunity to take a 30-minute, uninterrupted lunch break.

Furthermore, employers are not required to monitor whether or not the employees actually take the break. In other words, you are in charge of your break.

LUNCH BREAK AND REST BREAK ARE NOTABLY DIFFERENT

Lunch breaks and rest breaks are two different entities and should be separated. There are various topics of discussion about the premium wage employers owe a worker who misses a lunch break and a rest break in one day. Is it an hour of pay or two hours of pay, since two different violations have occurred? Under the California law, a worker that is denied both the lunch break and the rest break is eligible to 2 hours of extra pay. For instance, your employee cannot give you a single 1-hour break as the total time count for all of your rest breaks and lunch breaks. Of course, there are many exemptions to the above, like the healthcare, manufacturing, construction and the baking industries.

CALIFORNIA LUNCH BREAK REQUIREMENTS

According to Labor Code 512, nonexempt employees are eligible for a 30-minute uninterrupted lunch break after they have worked for five hours. The break must start no later than the end of the fifth hour of the employee’s shift. The employee can, however, agree with your employer to waive the lunch break if you do not work beyond 6 hours a day. If a nonexempt employee works for ten hours in a day, then they are eligible for another 30 minutes lunch break no later than the end of the tenth hour of employee’s shift.

If the employee’s entire workday does not exceed 12 hours, the worker may decide to give up their second lunch break, provided they actually took the first break. Before any lunch break can be waived, the employer must get the consent in writing and should be signed by both the employee and the employer to avoid future disputes.  In other words, the workers may not waive both breaks in one day. If the employer fails to comply with the requirements of the break law, they must pay the nonexempt employee one extra hour of regular pay for each of the days wherein a launch break law is violated.

CALIFORNIA EMPLOYEE ENTITLED TO LUNCH BREAKS

To understand what lunch breaks you are entitled to, you need to first understand the type of employee you are. Similar to California overtime laws, the lunch break law under California labor laws applies only to nonexempt workers. They are entitled to lunch break if they work five or more hours per day. Nonexempt employees include people hired in technical, professional, mechanical, clerical and other related job positions whether paid on commission, piece rate, salary or other bases.

AN EXCEPTION TO THE STANDARD CALIFORNIA LUNCH BREAK LAWS

A number of employees may not fall within the standard California lunch break requirements for nonexempt workers. These are employees that work in managerial, administrative, professional and executive capacities. They may include independent contractors, white-collar employees, and the unionized workers in some industries that are offered lunch breaks on a different plan or schedule.

For instance, the collective negotiation agreement provision on meal breaks supersede the California labor laws for unionized workers who work as commercial drivers and security officers, those who work in construction works, wholesale baking industry, broadcasting industry, motion picture industry and those that work for gas, electrical or public utility companies. Subject to Labor Code 515(a), an employee must satisfy the following conditions to be classified as an exempt employee:

• Earn a monthly salary equal to at least twice the California minimum wage for permanent employment.
• Have specific primary work duties
• Spend more than 1½ of their work time doing creative, managerial or intellectual work;
• Apply discretionary judgment and independent opinion to implement their duties

IS MY LUNCH BREAK PAID OR UNPAID?

The California labor law generally requires employers to provide a lunch break if the employee works for at least five hours in a shift. Employers do not have to pay for this time. In fact, lunch breaks are generally unpaid. On the other hand, some businesses may offer paid lunch break to their workers, but it is not mandatory for nonexempt workers under California labor laws.

CAN MY EMPLOYER CANCEL MY LUNCH BREAK?

Employers cannot cancel their employees’ lunch break. If an employer instructs their employees to get back to work while on lunch break, this is as good as denying the employees their meal break and it is an act that violates California labor laws. Employers are only required to offer a lunch break and are not to enforce the lunch break period. The decision to take a lunch break lies with the employee. If a worker willingly continues to work when they have lunch, then the employer is not responsible.

MY EMPLOYER REQUIRES THAT I WORK OR BE “ON-DUTY” DURING MY LUNCH BREAK

Generally, the California labor law does not require that an employer should allow employees to continue working or be “on-call” during lunch breaks. If the employer provides employees with lunch break, but the employees are not free from work duties during the break, then the meal is considered on-duty. This is legally tantamount to denying the employees the lunch break, and the employer must compensate the employee for the lunch break at the employee’s regular wage.

Even if the worker is relieved of all job activities during lunch break, but still need to be on the job site, the employer may be obligated, subject to California law to reimburse the worker for their lunch break. Nevertheless, employers are not mandated to ensure that employees do no work during their lunch break. Therefore, if employees willingly decide to work during their lunch break, then the employer is not responsible and not liable for any penalty. On the contrary, there are some exceptions where the California labor law allows employees to work during their lunch break. These include if:

• The nature of the work of an employee does not allow the employee to be reasonably relieved of all duties during lunch break, such as if the employee is the only person on duty. In this case, the employer and the employee may agree in writing to on-duty lunch breaks.
• The worker agrees in writing to remain on duty during lunch breaks. The employee can revoke this agreement in writing at any time, except under Wage Order 14 of Agricultural Occupations.

CAVEAT: Employers should be cautious and should consult a legal counsel before authorizing on-duty lunch breaks.  On-duty lunch breaks are upheld only in limited circumstances.

CAN I SUE MY EMPLOYER FOR FAILING TO ALLOW LUNCH BREAKS?

Subject to the California labor code 512, California workers may sue their employers for not allowing them to go for lunch breaks in the court of law. They can also file a class action on behalf of other workers that are denied lunch breaks. Any employer who is found guilty owes the employee an extra one-hour pay for each lunch break they denied the employee for a maximum penalty up to 2 hours wages a day. Note that your claims are dependent on strict filing deadlines. For lunch break violations, the filing deadline is usually considered three years according to a recent decision of the California Supreme Court. But in some cases, the 1-year filing deadline could apply. United Employees Law Group can help you file a California labor board complaint.

CAN EXEMPT SALARIED WORKERS SUE THEIR EMPLOYERS?

It depends. There are several different kinds of exceptions under California labor laws. As a supervisor, you may fall under the executive exemption, but that exception has various requirements, which your employer may have blown. Other kinds of exempt workers are also eligible for lunch break rights. For example, truck drivers are usually considered exempt employee but are eligible for lunch breaks under California labor laws. Again, schedule an appointment with a competent employment attorney to see if your situation qualifies for lunch breaks.

CAN BUSINESSES FORCE THEIR WORKERS TO TAKE A LUNCH BREAK IN CALIFORNIA?

Most big companies are often careful about penalties under California lunch break law. To ensure employees are getting their legal time for lunch, some businesses have put in place time-clock mobile app or software to clock-out employees by force for a 30-minutes lunch break every five hours. It is generally legal for an employer to forcibly clock-out their employees at set intervals, except the worker is mandated to be on-call or on-duty at that time, cannot leave the work premises, or is pressured to continue working during the break time. Employees who are clocked-out for lunch breaks by force, but are pressured to continue working may have a claim under California off-the-clock work law.

PENALTIES FOR FAILING TO PROVIDE LUNCH BREAKS

Any employer who fails to provide their employees with the required lunch break has violated the California work break law. Subject to the California Labor Code 226.7, the penalty for refusing to provide employees with a lunch break or refusing to pay workers when they unwillingly use their lunch break to work is equivalent to an extra hour of pay of the employee’s regular rate. The same punishment applies when a worker gives up both the first and the second lunch break, albeit both waivers are carried out willingly. For instance, if a worker who earns $13 per hour works for 8 hours a day and is not given a meal period, the employee is eligible to an extra pay of $13 for each day a lunch break was not given. Employers must pay for this missed lunch break in the employee’s next take-home pay. In the case an employer does not provide rest or lunch breaks, California labor law requires that employees should collect two days worth of pay for every workday for the past three years.

CONCLUSION

Employers should endeavor to audit their practices and policies about lunch breaks to ensure total compliance with the California wage and hour laws, thereby preventing any litigation. As a worker, there are instances your employer may have improperly denied you of your legal pay or workplace rights. For questions about California labor laws on lunch breaks or you want to discuss your case with an experienced California labor and employment lawyer, do not hesitate to contact United Employees Law Group.

Reference

https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/state/meal-breaks#California

Photo credits: Joseph Sohm/www.shutterstock.com

The post CALIFORNIA LABOR LAWS ON LUNCH BREAK appeared first on UELG.

Tired? Stressed? Need a break? Well, it is your employer’s duty to provide you with one.
Many workers assume that they must work consistently during the hours required by their employer. Fortunately, this is not the case. In California, according to the Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Orders, employers are required to provide employees with a rest break of at least 10 consecutive minutes for each 4 hours worked; however, a rest period is not required for employees who work less than three and one-half hours. Generally, rest periods should occur in the middle of each work period. Because rest periods are considered as time worked, an employer must pay for rest breaks. Also for this reason, employers may require employees to take their rest break on the employer’s premises. The employer is mandated to provide a suitable resting place separate from toilet facilities. An employee is not required to take a rest break and may skip a break as long as the employer does not promote it. There are several exceptions to the “rest period” rule, including employees of 24-hour residential care facilities and swimmers, dancers, skaters, and other performers whose job requires strenuous physical activity.

If your employer failed to provide or pay for rest breaks, you are entitled to one additional hour at your regular rate of pay for each day the rest period was not permitted.
According to the holding by the California Supreme Court in the case of Murphy v. Kenneth Cole Productions, 40 Cal.4th 1094 (2007) and Labor Code section 226.7, a claim for violation of rest breaks must typically be filed within three years.  As such, it is wise to take action early. Your first step should be to contact a California labor law attorney to ensure you are able to collect lost wages and penalties as far as 4 years back.

If for some reason you are unable to find a California employment attorney willing to accept your case you can also file a wage claim with the California Division of Labor Standards Enforcement (DLSE). The DLSE will typically only reclaim lost wages as far as 3 years prior and further penalties are at their discretion as well. Your claim will be assigned to a deputy labor commissioner who will determine whether there should be a conference, hearing or dismissal of the claim. If the deputy determines that a hearing is warranted, then the parties will testify under oath and the Labor Commissioner will serve an order, decision, or award. In the event that an order, decision, or award is made in favor of the aggrieved employee and the employer does not pay, the DLSE will have a judgment entered against the employer. Another problem may arise if the employer retaliates against you because you object to or have filed a claim against the employer for failing to provide required rest breaks. If this is the situation, you should likewise contact a California Labor lawyer first if your desired results are not reached you can also file a claim with the Labor Commissioner’s Office. 

If you believe you have been wrongfully denied a meal or rest breaks you should contact an experienced California labor law attorney. An attorney can guide you through the process and offer an unbiased evaluation of your particular situation.
If you have questions about this blog and if it applies to you call us now at: (415) 200-0012

Photo Credit: Shutterstock/Eviart

The post California Law Requires Employee Break Periods appeared first on UELG.

California employees are entitled to certain expectations when it comes to getting paid. There are exceptions to most any rule of course, which you can find in the chart that follows, but otherwise the information here regards the pay guidelines for all California workers.

1. California employees are required to be paid at least two times in every month. The employer must have predetermined pay days that the employee can count on being paid all wages owed. In addition, the company must post in writing how, when and where payment will be remitted.

2. All wages earned from the 1^st day to the 15^th day of the months must be paid to the employee by the 26^th day of that month; likewise pay earned from the 16^th day to the end of the month must be received by the employee by the 1oth of the following month. If your pay period is other than above, such as bi-monthly or every two weeks, you must be paid no later than 7 days after the end of that pay period. If your employer fails to comply with this timeline they may be liable for penalties and interest.

3. All overtime pay earned must also be paid in the following pay period, and all overtime pay must comply with the labor code.

4. If you are fired or let go your company must pay all the money they owe you within 24 hours of leaving the company. This includes wages, commissions and accrued vacation time.

5. Anyone laid off on a seasonal job must likewise be paid within 72 hours of the layoff date.

Some of the exceptions to these rules are as follows.

United employees Law Group helps employees everyday who have disputes with current and former employers, but do not wait until it’s too late to collect what you are owed. Call now we are here to help.

The post When you get paid is important. appeared first on UELG.

As clearly stated, in Federal labor law, which all the employees working for more than 40 hours on per week basis are required to be paid 1.5 times of their normal monthly pay rate by their respective employers. On the other hand, Labor laws in California signifies more specifically by stating that if a labor or employee works for his employers over and above the normal hours of 8 in a day and 40 hours in total in a week, then they must be paid 1.5 times of their regular monthly pay or salary. As a result of these laws, majority of the employers takes a step ahead to prevent the payment of overtime to their labors by making sure that each employee works only as per the designated schedule which restricts them not to work above 8 hours a day or 40 hours a week. Therefore, they have created the traditional weekly work schedule of 5 days a week consisting of 8 hours on daily basis.

But it is a very common practice in some industries to have long and stretch shifts for their workers. Consequently, employers would certainly demands his or her workforce to work 4 days a week consisting of 10 hours a day or it might be a 3 days a week consisting of 12 hours a day. But this act of employers would be really unjust from the viewpoint of employees, as most of their earned overtime has not be paid to them and this fact is accordingly mentioned as per the California labor laws. Thus, it indicates that employer might not desire to pay off such overtime to their workforce and which as a result indicates that most of their employees would not be able to relief for a shorter week of working hours.

The solution which the State has offered is that the employer can validly apply to avail the facility of having an alternative work week schedule for the employees. With this facility, the employees would be able to keep their work week rather shorter and in addition, employers would not require paying the daily overtime to their workers. For this work out accordingly, the employees must cast their individual vote in favor or against the new working schedule offered by the employers and the vote will take effect only if it is approved by the majority of a 2/3 workers or employees for that new schedule. And if the vote is successfully passed, the employer must abandon their registration with the state with immediate effects.
But the overtime is still owed to the employees if they work for more than 40 hours in a week or it gets double when employees work for more than 12 hours in day. Furthermore, margins for breaks during the works is also increased; second break of 30 minutes is offered when the employees work for more than 10 hours and another 10 minutes break is offered when the working hours increased to 12 hours a day.

Therefore, if you are not paid for your overtime work, you must check to confirm that whether your employer has registration with the state by visiting The Department of Industrial Relations. If not, then you must immediately consult one of the California labor law attorneys to review your position.

Remember, if you have any queries and doubts regarding your employment or overtime related matter, then it is our suggestion to you to please visit California labor law attorney who can seriously help you to understand your position more clearly and they might not charge even in some cases.
Feel free to contact us at in case you have any questions about this article or our blog:

San Francisco – (415) 200-0012 or (415) 230-2755

Photo Credit: Shutterstock/Vlad Teodor

The post Alternative Work Weeks in California. WHO GETS OVERTIME? appeared first on UELG.

Just because you got fired doesn’t mean your boss broke the law.

It’s easy to feel like you’ve been horribly wronged if you’ve just lost your job, and while we represent many employees who have faced wrongful termination, the truth is that most of us have been fired at least once and with no legal recourse. Just being angry and thinking you should not have been fired IS NOT CAUSE TO SUE your employer. BUT, and it’s a big but, in more cases than I can count employees who bring their cases to us often find they have a wage claim they did not even know about.

Sometimes it takes something as disruptive as being booted completely to realize there were other things going on in your office. The most common situation we encounter involves overtime violations for hourly employees. Because wage and overtime laws are a moving target, and constantly changing based on new legislation and case law, employers frequently are not up to date on the correct wage regulation or when and how to pay their employees who are eligible for overtime pay.

“I didn’t know” is not good enough though. It is your company’s responsibility to know how to pay you, and if they fail to do so properly they are liable for the unpaid wages PLUS interest and possible penalties.

As an employee representative, you may think UELG would be “sue happy” but in truth the opposite could be said; we are here to help employees who have TRULY been wronged by their employer. It does no one any good to spend hundreds of man hours pursuing cases without merit. This is why we know how to collect the right information from you and determine quickly if you could have a good case against your employer.  In many cases we are able to get these issues settled without court time, saving everyone time and headaches.

If you believe you have a claim against your employer we encourage you to call right away. There is limited time to file, and only an experienced employment lawyer can tell you if you really have a case.

Stop complaining and take action. The team at UELG IS HERE TO HELP.  CALL NOW.

Photo Credit: Shutterstock/Andrey_Popov

The post ANGRY does not mean RIGHT. When You Should Sue. appeared first on UELG.

HISTORY:

ALARMCO is engaged in the business of providing security alarm services to retail businesses throughout California. Specifically, ALARMCO provides equipment, installation, repairs and maintenance services.

In order to provide these services, ALARMCO maintains operating agreements with its customers to provide repair and response services. To provide these services, ALARMCO employs a fleet of technicians.

When a service call is requested, ALARMCO requires that the technician immediately report in an ALARMCO vehicle to the repair site in uniform.

The practical effect of this on-call schedule and the on-call requirements is that the technicians are effectively under the control of ALARMCO while on standby during the entire on-call week. As a practical matter, the response time and the additional restrictions on the use of the company vehicle and the clothing requirement, means that the on-call technicians must remain at home next to their phone and within five minutes of their ALARMCO vehicle. The technicians are severely limited in the engagement of personal pursuits during the on-call time because of the specified time requirements.

Because they must respond immediately to all calls means that the technicians cannot go to dinner or a movie, attend a concert, travel for a weekend getaway, or have a beer while they are on call wherein they are subject to receiving a call that requires driving in an ALARMCO vehicle to perform on site repair services.

On-call status places technicians in a state of constant readiness 24/7 outside of their regular 40 hour work schedule during the standby week. ALARMCO technicians are expected to respond day or night, dropping all other activities including sleep and meals, and remain on the job until it is completed.

The work required of the technicians while on standby is so regularly scheduled and frequent that the time spent waiting for call requests should be compensable as the technicians are not able to engage in personal pursuits during these standby periods.

ANALYSIS:

On-call time for the technicians constitutes employer “controlled standby” which must be compensated. The legal test as to whether standby time is compensable work time was established by the California Supreme Court in Madera Police Officers Association v. City of Madera, 36 Cal. 3d 403 (1984)

In reaching this conclusion we adopt a two-step analysis. We first examine whether the restrictions on off-duty time are primarily directed toward the fulfillment of the employer’s requirements and policies. Second, we analyze whether the employees’ off-duty time is so substantially restricted that they are unable to engage in private pursuits.

Madera, supra, 36 Cal. 3d at 409.

The on-call schedule, coupled with the strict requirements for response time, arrival time and resolution time substantially restricts the technicians’ off-duty time, rendering ALARMCO liable for all the waiting time spent by the technicians during the standby periods.

Applying the two step process under Madera to ALARMCO’s policies and practices, we find that ALARMCO requires that service calls be responded to immediately. The on-call and response time requirements are all directed towards the fulfillment of ALARMCO’s uniform contractual obligations to its customers and in accordance therewith technicians are graded not only on “response” time but also on the time spent actually resolving the call. As a result, the de facto requirement is that technicians drop everything when a call is received, drive to the destination and resolve the service request. These requirements so substantially restrict a technician’s personal time while on standby, that he is effectively unable to engage in private pursuits.

SUMMARY:

Simply being on-call is not enough under Madera for standby time to be compensable. The Madera Court affirms that “on-call status, coupled with other factors, is required to entitle an employee to compensation.” Madera, supra, at 411. In this situation technicians are not only on-call but are required to immediately respond and resolve the equipment malfunction and do so by reporting in an ALARMCO vehicle while in uniform. Given the high frequency of service calls, along with the factors stated above, the technicians are effectively subject to the “control” of ALARMCO while on-call.

In reviewing situations such as this, whereby various factors must be weighed and considered, it should be noted that the wage and hour laws of California are remedial enactments for the “protection and benefit of employees” and therefore the “statutory provisions are to be liberally construed with an eye to promoting such protection.” Ramirez v. Yosemite Water Co., 20 Cal.4th 785, 794_795 (1999). Any doubts should be resolved in favor of the employee.

If you have any questions regarding your entitlement or rights under the California Labor Code, consult with a California Labor Attorney who specializes in labor law. In many instances your questions may be handled without charge based on the policies of each law firm.

Photo Credit: Shutterstock/Mego Studio

The post Should you be compensated for Stand-by time? appeared first on UELG.