Ruling on a matter of first impression under Maryland law, the Maryland Supreme Court recently decided, in Martinez, et al. v. Amazon.com Services LLC, Misc. No. 17, Sept. Term 2024 (July 3, 2025), that the rule of “de...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: While reversing a grant of summary judgment in favor of an employer based on the de minimis doctrine, the Ninth Circuit held that the doctrine still can apply under the FLSA....more
In Tyger v. Precision Drilling Corp., the Third Circuit Court of Appeals clarified the circumstances under which donning and doffing activities by employees may be compensable under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). ...more
For decades, the Department of Labor (DOL) has recognized the impracticability of requiring Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) nonexempt employees to clock in exactly at the beginning of their scheduled shifts. In most...more
I read an interesting blog post by Seyfarth Shaw on a working time case in a call center. I have often blogged about working time cases, preliminary/postliminary cases, and have lamented that the de minimis doctrine, often...more
In Part 2 of our blog series highlighting some of the risks for employers when pay and time practices don’t comport with wage and hour laws, the case details and key takeaways below should provide West Coast employers...more
As it turns out, yes, people do care about time. Two recent court cases highlight some of the risks for employers when pay and timekeeping practices don’t comport with wage and hour laws. We’ll provide overviews of each case...more
In this blog series, we’ll look at a variety of activities and discuss whether an employer has to pay its non-exempt (i.e., overtime-eligible) employees for their time spent engaging in them. We’ll focus on federal law, but...more
On September 30, 2020, Governor Newsom signed into law AB 2231, which limits the “de minimis” exception to California prevailing wage laws to all but the smallest projects. Specifically, the new law limits the de minimis...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
I have been writing about wage hour issues that are implicated or raised by the continuing COVID-19 situation. Well, here’s another one. I warn that as businesses start to open up (or not), employees (and, more to the point,...more
The California appellate courts, and the California Supreme Court, continue to weigh in on significant and compelling wage and hour issues that affect employers each day. “Hours Worked” Under The Control Test – Going Back...more
As Labor Day and "back to school" beckon, what new laws and trends are we seeing in California? Here are my picks: NATURAL HAIR MUST BE ALLOWED. A new California statute says natural hair styles must be allowed. So take a...more
For years, courts applied the de minimis doctrine “to excuse the payment of wages for small amounts of otherwise compensable time upon a showing that the bits of time are administratively difficult to record.” Troester v....more
This edition of Employment Flash looks at developments in labor and employment law, including a Supreme Court ruling that Title VII’s charge-filing requirement is nonjurisdictional and new state legislation in New York,...more
On June 14, 2019, a panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral argument in consolidated appeals involving the compensability of pre-exit inspections of employee bags at two retail clothing store chains. While the...more
Last year, the California Supreme Court held the federal “de minimis” doctrine does not apply to California state law claims for unpaid wages for off-the-clock work allegedly performed on a regularly occurring basis in store...more
This month’s key employment law cases address meal periods and payment of wages....more
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
It’s hard to keep up with the news these days. It sometimes feels like you can’t step away from your phone, computer, or TV for more than an hour or so without a barrage of new information hitting the headlines—and you’re...more
Smartphones have changed the employment landscape. Non-exempt employees can communicate via text or email any time of day or night, and may be expected to. My habit in the evenings is to check my work email, even if only to...more
In Troester v. Starbucks Corporation, the California Supreme Court recently held that the federal de minimis doctrine does not apply to claims for unpaid wages under the California Labor Code. As a follow-up to our recent...more
California’s wage-and-hour laws are the most protective in the country. These protections, however, often lead to bankrupting, class-action lawsuits. Originally posted in The Press-Enterprise and other Southern California...more
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