On December 13, 2011, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reconsidered the case, Sullivan v. Oracle Corp., after the California Supreme Court had decided several certified questions of law. The Ninth Circuit had previously delayed ruling, and instead asked the California Supreme Court to decide three questions of California law, including whether a company with its principal place of business in California was required to pay out-of-state employees temporarily working in California according to Californiaâ€™s daily overtime rules.
Articles Discussing California Wage & Hour Laws.
Nonresident-Employees Working in California Entitled to Overtime under State Law, Ninth Circuit Rules
Nonresidents of California are entitled to overtime pay under California law for work performed in California, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has ruled, following the California Supreme Courtâ€™s responses to its questions on state law. Sullivan v. Oracle Corp., 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 24625 (9th Cir. Dec. 13, 2011). The Ninth Circuit reversed summary judgment in favor of the employer on claims for unpaid overtime under the California Labor Code (â€œLabor Codeâ€), as well as on claims under the California Unfair Competition Law (â€œUCLâ€), which were predicated on the Labor Code violations. However, the Court held that the UCL did not apply to alleged violations of the federal Fair Labor Standards Act occurring outside of California.
Minimum Salary Requirement Increases for California Computer Professional Exemption Announced
The required compensation levels for employees exempt from overtime under the California computer professional exemption will increase by 2.5 percent from the current levels beginning January 1, 2012, the California Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) has announced.
Employers Must Comply with Changes to San Francisco Health Care Mandate Beginning January 1, 2012
San Franciscoâ€™s Health Care Security Ordinance has been amended to require more of certain employers with workers in the City and County of San Francisco. The amendments will take effect January 1, 2012.
Federal District Court Holds Motor Carriers Are Not Subject to California’s Meal and Rest Break Laws
A federal district court in California recently issued a decision, in Dilts v. Penske Logistics, LLC, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 122421 (S.D. Cal. Oct. 19, 2011), holding that motor carriers that transport property are not subject to California’s meal and rest break laws because such laws are preempted by the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act (FAAA Act).
What Is the Duty to “Provide” a Meal Period? Oral Argument Before the California Supreme Court in Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. Superior Court
The long awaited oral argument in the seminal meal and rest break decision involving Brinker Restaurant finally occurred today. Before a packed courtroom, lawyers for a hopeful class of waiters and waitresses and the representatives of California employers battled it out before the seven justices of the California Supreme Court.
California’s 2012 Minimum Hourly, Monthly and Yearly Rates for Exempt Computer Software, Physician and Surgeon Employees
Under the California Labor Code, certain computer software employees, as well as licensed physicians and surgeons, are exempt from state overtime requirements if they receive a minimum hourly, monthly or yearly rate. The rate is determined annually based upon changes to the California Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers. Because the Index experienced a 2.5% increase over the past year, the California Division of Labor Standards Enforcement (DLSE) adjusted the rates these individuals must be paid to be considered overtime-exempt.
California Supreme Court: Nonresident-Employees Entitled to State Overtime When Working in State
Nonresidents of California are entitled to overtime pay under state law for work performed in California, the California Supreme Court has held, answering questions about California law at the request of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Sullivan v. Oracle Corp., 51 Cal. 4th 1191 (Cal. 2011).
California Court Clarifies Scheduled Overnight Shifts Not Entitled to Split Shift Pay
The California Court of Appeal has held that employees who work overnight shifts that begin on one day and conclude on the next, but which are not interrupted by unpaid, non-working periods, do not work â€œsplit shifts,â€ as defined in the applicable Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Order. Securitas Security Services USA, Inc. v. Superior Court (Holland), No. B227950 (Cal. Ct. App. July 7, 2011). As fact questions existed whether the employees, in other circumstances, had performed split shift work, the Court remanded the case to the trial court.
Unlicensed Accountants May be Entitled to Overtime under California Law, Federal Court Rules
Reversing summary judgment for more than 2,000 unlicensed junior accountants in a class action lawsuit, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (San Francisco) has held that the plaintiff-accountants were not â€œcategorically ineligibleâ€ to be exempt from overtime under Californiaâ€™s professional and administrative exemptions. Campbell v. PricewaterhouseCoopers, LLP, No. 09-16370 (9th Cir. June 15, 2011). The Court ruled the district court erred in determining the unlicensed accountants, who were required by law to work under the supervision of a licensed accountant, could never meet the requirements for exempt employees. The Court warned against categorically excluding entire classes of employees from overtime exemption analyses.
California Court Rules Employer Not Required to Pay Overtime under Explicit Mutual Wage Agreement
A California employer did not owe overtime to an employee because it had entered into an explicit mutual wage agreement that provided for base compensation and overtime in one lump sum, the California Court of Appeal has ruled. Arechiga v. Dolores Press, Inc., No. B218171 (Cal. Ct. App. Feb. 7, 2011). Affirming the dismissal of the employeeâ€™s claim, the Court upheld the validity of explicit mutual wage agreements for non-exempt employees under California law.