ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Labor & Employment Law Blogs -> California Labor & Employment Defense Blog

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Labor & Employment Law

: California Labor & Employment Defense Blog

Employees are Entitled to At Least Two Hours' Compensation for Attending Meetings -- Price v. Starbucks

ADVERTISEMENTS

As we have previously blogged, reporting time pay -- i.e., the requirement to pay a minimum of two to four hours of compensation each time an employee is required to report to work -- is one of the most overlooked requirements of California wage and hour law.   The decision in Price v. Starbucks is thus perhaps the first reported case to seriously grapple with the calculation of wages due under the requirement.  

Price was a less-than-stellar barista who was asked to come in to work on his day off to get fired.  Since the employer had required him to come to work to get the bad news he was clearly entitled to some "reporting time pay."  The question was: how much? 

The canned barista didn't have a regularly scheduled shift time but he averaged about six hours per day when he did work.  So he contended that he was entitled to half of this average or about three hours of pay.  The Court, however, focused on the fact that when Price reported to work on his last day he knew he was there only for a brief meeting and had no expectation of being put to work.  As a result, the Court concluded that he was only entitled to the minimum payment of two hours' pay:

Section 5(A) of Wage Order Number 5-2001 states: Each workday an employee is required to report for work and does report, but is not put to work or is furnished less than half said employee's usual or scheduled day's work, the employee shall be paid for half the usual or scheduled day's work, but in no event for less than two (2) hours nor more than four (4) hours, at the employee's regular rate of pay, which shall not be less than the minimum wage.

The use of the disjunctive 'or' in this regulation, is used in the ordinary sense, suggesting alternatives. If an employee is required to work, reports to work, and is not put to work or does not work half of the employees' usual or scheduled day's work, the employee is paid a half-shift reporting wage not to exceed four hours. If an employee is not scheduled to work or does not expect to work his usual shift, but must report to work for a meeting, the employee falls into the regulatory category of those employees called to work on their day off for a scheduled meeting. Price was entitled to the minimum payment, which is what he received.

Thus, the Court seems to have created a bright-line rule that employees are entitled to only two hours of pay when they are called in to work to "attend a meeting for an unspecified number of hours."   I can't say that I necessarily follow the Court's linguistic analysis.  But at least this rule is clear and easy to apply.

 

  

 

Full post as published by California Labor & Employment Defense Blog on February 23, 2011 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles

Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.014 secs (new cache)