Skip to main content

Employee Must Show an Employer "Knew of or Should Have Known" of Off the Clock Work in Order to Proceed On Unpaid Wages Claim


Jong v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc. - California Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, Division Three 


Facts:  Henry Jong worked as an outpatient pharmacy manager for Kaiser.  After leaving Kaiser, Jong and two other outpatient pharmacy managers brought a class action against Kaiser and alleged they had not been paid for off the clock overtime hours worked, in violation of California Labor Code Section 1194.  The employees alleged that after being reclassified from exempt to non-exempt employees (exempt employees are generally not entitled to overtime pay while non-exempt employees are), they were "forced" to work off the clock overtime hours to keep up with Kasier's demands.  

The trial court granted Kaiser's motion for summary judgment and held that Jong failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether Kaiser knew or should have known that he worked overtime hours.  Jong appealed to the Court of Appeal.

Holding:  The Court of Appeal affirmed the lower court's ruling and held that while there was evidence that Jong was criticized for working overtime, there was no evidence that his supervisors instructed him to work off the clock, that Jong had advised his supervisors that he would work off the clock to meet their expectations, or that his supervisors knew he was doing so.  As well, while Jong had shown that Kaiser should have been aware that its pharmacy managers often worked in excess of 50 hours a week because of a previous class action, whether Kaiser was aware that an employee worked off the clock was specific to the circumstances of a particular employee.  

The Court of Appeal further held that Jong had failed to produce any evidence that Kaiser was aware of his off the clock work because Jong disabled the security alarm before clocking in for work.  As a result, Jong failed to present any evidence that Kaiser knew or should have known what he was doing between the time he turned off the alarm and clocked in for work.  

Judgment:  The Court of Appeal affirmed the lower court's ruling and held that Jong failed to show that Kaiser knew or should have known of his off the clock work.  Failure to present evidence of this resulted in Jong's inability to prevail upon his unpaid wages claim.

The Takeaway:  This is a good case for employers to rely upon and show that if they are not aware of an employee's off the clock work, employers should not be liable for the unpaid wages.  If an employer does not know or have reason to know of this off the clock work, it follows that they should not be forced to pay employees for the work done.  

On the other hand, employers cannot bury their heads in the sand and intentionally avoid being aware of an employee who works off the clock.  This type of willful ignorance likely would not allow an employer to escape liability for unpaid wages.  

Majority Opinion Judge:  Judge Pollak

Date:  May 20, 2014

Opinion:  http://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/A138725.PDF

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NLRB: Discussion Among Employees About Tip Pooling is Protected Concerted Activity

  This Advice Memorandum from the National Labor Relations Board’s Associate General Counsel, Jayme Sophir, addressed whether employees which discussed and complained about tip pooling at work constituted protected concerted activity. In relevant part, an employer in New York operated a chain of steakhouses.  While tip pooling was in place at these steakhouses, some of the employees objected to it on the grounds that it was not transparent and improperly divided tips among the workers.  Employees were told not to complain or talk to each other about the tip pool and were told that doing so would endanger their jobs.  Despite the employer later attempting to provide some clarity as to how the tips were being divided, rancor still existed among some employees.  At one point, the employees were told by a general manager that some employees that had been talking about the tip pool were “cleared out” and the employer would continue to do so. In the Advice Memorandum, it was noted that emplo
Post a Comment
Read more

What I’ve Been Reading This Week

A few years ago, I remember when the “Fight for $15” movement was taking off around the country.  Lo and behold, it appears that a $15/hour minimum wage is not the stopping point, which should be no surprise.  As the below article notes, New York is aggressively moving to ramp up hourly wage rates even higher.  While all the  below articles are worth a read, I called particular attention to that one. As always, below are a couple article that caught my eye this week. Disney World Workers Reject Latest Contract Offer Late last week, it was announced that workers at Disney World had rejected the most recent contract offer from the company, calling on their employer to do better.  As Brooks Barnes at The New York Times writes, the unions that represent about 32,000 workers at Disney World reported their members resoundingly rejected the 5 year contract offer which would have seen workers receive a 10% raise and retroactive increased back pay.  While Disney’s offer would have increased pa
Post a Comment
Read more

Utah Non-Compete Bill Falters in House

Last month, a non-compete bill sponsored by Representative Brian Greene (Republican from Pleasant Grove) & up for vote in the Utah House failed to make it through the Legislature.  The bill sought to ban enforcement of non-competes if they came after a worker was already employed, given no compensation (such as a bonus or promotion) for signing the non-compete, and laid off within six months.  However, by a 22 - 49 vote, the bill was resoundingly defeated after some business groups lobbied to kill the non-compete bill.  One group in particular, The Free Enterprise Utah coalition, argued that the Utah State Legislature should hold off on any changes to non compete laws in the state until a survey about non competes was done among Utah businesses.  Representative Greene had countered this claim and argued that a survey was not needed to show that the current non compete laws in the states allowed many businesses, including some small high tech companies in the state, to per
Post a Comment
Read more