News & Analysis as of

CA Supreme Court Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) Starbucks

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Oh, The Places The California Supremes Will Go!

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

Seyfarth Synopsis: With apologies to Dr. Seuss, we’ve penned an ode to the judicial chaos of the year just past, highlighted by three California Supreme Court decisions—Alvarado v. Dart Container Corp., Dynamex Operations v....more

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

Starbucks to Face Suit Over De Minimis Time

Starbucks to Face Suit Over De Minimis Time - Why it matters - A putative class action against Starbucks will move forward after the U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit applied the reasoning of the California Supreme...more

Fisher Phillips

Of Trifles And Truffle Mochas: How A Recent Case Against Starbucks May Impact Retailers

Fisher Phillips on

This past summer, in a high-profile case brought against Starbucks, the California Supreme Court resolved an open question concerning compensable time. Or, at least it did to some extent. The court held that California...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

California Supreme Court Says Employers Must Pay for Several Minutes of Off-the-Clock Work

Foley & Lardner LLP on

Last Thursday, July 26, the California Supreme Court issued an opinion concluding that coffee retailer Starbucks must pay its employees for off-the-clock duties that take several minutes per shift. In issuing its opinion, the...more

Perkins Coie

California’s High Court Rejects FLSA’s De Minimis Doctrine

Perkins Coie on

The California Supreme Court issued an opinion on July 26, 2018, and found that the federal Fair Labor Standards Act’s de minimis doctrine does not apply to claims for unpaid wages under the California Labor Code. Federal...more

Buchalter

California Supreme Court Rejects De Minimis Doctrine for Off-The-Clock Work Claims

Buchalter on

Douglas Troester v. Starbucks Corporation (July 26, 2018) - On July 26, 2018, the California Supreme Court issued a decision entitled Douglas Troester v. Starbucks Corporation, No. S234969, which should be of concern to...more

Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati

California Supreme Court Rejects Employer Argument that It Need Not Pay for De Minimis Amounts of Time Worked by Employees

Once again, California's Supreme Court has underscored that California employment law can differ from federal law in significant, and typically more employee friendly, ways. In Douglas Troester v. Starbucks Corporation,1 a...more

Ervin Cohen & Jessup LLP

Employment Law Reporter August 2018: California High Court Restricts Employer-Friendly ‘De Minimis’ Defense for Off-the-Clock Work

Last Thursday, the California Supreme Court issued a ground-breaking decision that severely limits employers’ ability to rely on the ‘de minimis’ doctrine as a defense to not paying for minimal increments of off-the-clock...more

Alston & Bird

California Tosses De Minimis Doctrine for Off-the-Clock Work

Alston & Bird on

The California Supreme Court has rejected the federal Fair Labor Standards Act’s de minimis doctrine and put the burden on employers to account for “all hours worked.” Our Labor & Employment Group explains the court’s ruling...more

Blank Rome LLP

“De Minimis” May Be Down, but It’s Not Out—And What Does It Mean for Employer Rounding Policies in California?

Blank Rome LLP on

On July 26, 2018, the California Supreme Court issued its long-awaited opinion in Troester v. Starbucks Corp., __ P.3d __ (2018). In the days that have followed, legal headlines have lamented the presumed “death” of the de...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

How Much Is Closing a Door Worth? The California Supreme Court Addresses the De Minimis Doctrine - Labor & Employment Newsletter

On August 6, 2012, Douglas Troester, a former shift supervisor at a Starbucks location, filed a lawsuit against Starbucks in state court in Los Angeles, California. Mr. Troester filed his lawsuit on behalf of himself and a...more

Kilpatrick

California Supreme Court: the FLSA’s de minimus rule does not apply to California wage and hour claims, especially wage and hour...

Kilpatrick on

It is a small world after all. Last week, the California Supreme Court decided that the de minimus rule, imported by the U.S. Supreme Court into the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) in 1946 (Anderson v. Mt. Clemens Pottery...more

BakerHostetler

California State Court Rules That Loose Change Adds Up … and So Will the Penalties

BakerHostetler on

We’ve all been there: You pull up to a parking spot, hop out to check whether the meter requires payment on Sunday and then grumble as you fish around in the coin tray. With any luck, you find a quarter or two. More often...more

Farella Braun + Martel LLP

California Supreme Court Declines to Apply Federal Excuse for Short Unrecorded Work Periods

Last week, in Troester v. Starbucks, a unanimous California Supreme Court held that California labor statutes and wage orders do not incorporate federal de minimis work exceptions. Yet, the Court declined to define when, if...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

California High Court Rejects De Minimis Standard, Requiring Employers to Account for and Compensate Even Small Increments of Time...

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

In a long-awaited decision, the California Supreme Court rejected the federal de minimis doctrine, making clear that in any instance in which employees perform “minutes of work,” before or after their shifts, that time must...more

Downey Brand LLP

California Supreme Court Declines to Apply the Federal De Minimis Doctrine to Post-Shift Activities

Downey Brand LLP on

Last week, the California Supreme Court ruled in favor of a former Starbucks employee seeking compensation for time spent closing the store after clocking out. This decision in Troester v. Starbucks may limit the ability of...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

California Supreme Court Issues Narrow Holding In De Minimis Case, Leaving Many Issues Unresolved

On July 26, 2018, the California Supreme Court issued its long awaited decision in Troester v. Starbucks Corporation (S234969) on whether California wage and hour law recognizes the de minimis doctrine established by the...more

Morgan Lewis

California Supreme Court Holds That Employees Must Be Paid for Routinely Worked Minutes Off the Clock

Morgan Lewis on

In Troester v. Starbucks Corp., the California Supreme Court held that the Fair Labor Standards Act’s de minimis doctrine does not apply to wage claims under California law. However, the court left open the question of...more

Orrick - Employment Law and Litigation

Wait a Minute…California Supreme Court Says Employers Must Pay for De Minimis Off-the-Clock Work

On July 26, 2018, the California Supreme Court found that employers must compensate workers for the time they spend on certain menial tasks after clocking out of their shifts. In a unanimous decision, the Court held that...more

Stoel Rives - World of Employment

California Supreme Court Determines that the Federal De Minimis Doctrine Does Not Apply to California Wage Claims

In Troester v. Starbucks Corp., the California Supreme Court determined that the federal de minimis doctrine does not apply to California wage claims. While this ruling does not completely eviscerate this legal defense for...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

California Supreme Court Declines to Adopt Federal De Minimis Rule for Wage Claims

Employers in California must compensate workers for all reasonably measurable time worked, according to a California Supreme Court ruling on July 26, 2018. A unanimous court held that the so-called “de minimis” rule...more

Nilan Johnson Lewis PA

California Employers On the Hook for Tracking Employee Time

Nilan Johnson Lewis PA on

On Thursday, July 26, the California Supreme Court held that California employers may no longer ignore or fail to compensate for small amounts of time that non-exempt employees work simply because recording that time is...more

Carlton Fields

California Rejects Federal Wage And Hour ‘De Minimus’ Doctrine Causing Havoc For Employers

Carlton Fields on

Creating havoc for employers in California, the California Supreme Court yesterday rejected the federal “de minimis” doctrine for wage and hour regulations. ...more

Lewitt Hackman

Grande Or Venti? CA Supreme Court Weighs In On The De Minimis Question

Lewitt Hackman on

De minimis is a Latin phrase that refers to something of little importance, or very irrelevant. The federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) recognizes that some employee duties are so small, or take such little time, that...more

Holland & Knight LLP

California Supreme Court Curbs De Minimis Doctrine For Wage Claims

Holland & Knight LLP on

• In Troester v. Starbucks Corporation, the California Supreme Court on July 26, 2018, resoundingly rejected the de minimis doctrine commonly applied under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) to claims for unpaid...more

30 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide