Employment Law Now IV-55 – Six Significant Developments to be On Your Radar
Is an employee compensable for time spent on waiting and exit searches as "hours worked," even after clocking out? Per the California Supreme Court, it depends on the level of the employer's control over its employees....more
There have been a number of cases, in different jurisdictions, involving whether time spent undergoing security checks is compensable time. One issue involved is whether the activity is for the benefit of the employer and if...more
At the request of the 9th Circuit, the California Supreme Court recently clarified the definition of “hours worked” under the Labor Code. In Huerta v. CSI Electrical Contractors, the employees worked at a solar power...more
On March 25, 2024, the California Supreme Court held that workers are entitled to compensation for time spent undergoing exit security checks that included an inspection of their personal vehicle. In the same decision, the...more
In its recent opinion in Huerta v. CSI Electrical Contractors, the California Supreme Court addressed three inquiries posed by the 9th Circuit. These inquiries specifically relate to the definition of “hours worked” within...more
California employers who require employees to pass through a security checkpoint or swipe a security badge before exiting their worksites but after clocking out could potentially face significant liability for violating...more
On March 25, 2024, the California Supreme Court unanimously answered three questions regarding the meaning of "hours worked” that had been certified to it by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal. This ruling illuminates what...more
On Monday, the California Supreme Court issued its opinion in Huerta v. CSI Electrical Contractors Inc., answering three questions about the scope of the term “hours worked” in Wage Order No. 16. While Wage Order No.16...more
In Huerta v. CSI Electrical Contractors, No. S275431 (March 25, 2024), the California Supreme Court issued an important decision relating to whether California employers must pay non-exempt employees for certain pre-shift...more
On March 10, 2023, a unanimous three-judge panel upheld an Oregon federal court’s ruling that time Amazon employees spent undergoing mandatory security screenings before and after work shifts and off-premises meal breaks was...more
On December 15, 2022, the Oregon Supreme Court gave employers important clarity regarding compensable work time in Buero v. Amazon.com Services, Inc. The plaintiff in Buero, a warehouse employee, claimed that Amazon had...more
I have blogged many times on security check cases and whether that waiting time is compensable. It continues to be a thorny issue and pops up in many jurisdictions. In an interesting variation on this theme, the California...more
The California Supreme Court will soon decide if employees must be compensated for time spent waiting in their cars to pass through an employer’s security check. Specifically, the California Supreme Court will decide...more
Many people are employed at airports. Of those, many individuals work within the terminals for private companies. Federal law requires that those employees who work in the terminals must go through security checks – just...more
According to a recent decision, employers who want to keep employees on their premises for security checks after they have already clocked out must pay their employees to do so—at least in Pennsylvania....more
Seyfarth Synopsis: An unpublished Ninth Circuit opinion has held that an employer need not pay employees for time spent undergoing government-required security checks en route to their worksite within the Los Angeles...more
On July 21, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court issued a game-changing decision in Heimbach v. Amazon.com Inc. when it determined that: Time a nonexempt employee spends waiting to undergo, and undergoing, mandatory security...more
On July 21, 2021, answering a question certified by the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court held that time spent by employees waiting to undergo and undergoing mandatory...more
Employers who require employees to undergo mandatory security checks, health screenings, or similar pre- or post-shift activities take note: a growing number of courts have determined time spent waiting to undergo and...more
On March 3, 2021, U.S. District Judge William Alsup of the Northern District of California said he would partially rule in favor of a class of California retail industry workers against Apple, finding those workers were...more
While 2020 has been an incomparable year of change, somethings remain the same. There is never a shortage of onerous new demands on California businesses. Join us for a lively discussion of what you need to know for 2021. We...more
Frlekin v. Apple, Inc., 2020 WL 5225699 (9th Cir. 2020) - Earlier this year, the California Supreme Court answered a question certified to it by the Ninth Circuit: “Is time spent on the employer’s premises waiting for,...more
Many employers with operations in California may already be familiar with Frlekin v. Apple, Inc. The heavily litigated case, first filed in 2013, involves claims that Apple retail employees are entitled to compensation for...more
The long-fought bag-check battle against Apple is coming to an end, and the employee class just won a major victory in California when a federal court of appeals ruled that the company must pay its workers for the time spent...more
Frlekin v. Apple Inc., 2020 WL 727813 (Cal. S. Ct. 2020) - In this opinion, the California Supreme Court answered a question certified to it by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: “Is time spent on...more