Skip to main content

Mandatory Payroll Debit Cards Unlawful...At Least in Pennsylvania


Siciliano v. Albert/Carol Mueller t/a McDonalds - Superior Court of Pennsylvania


Facts:  Albert and Carol Mueller ("Muellers"), through a limited partnership, owned and operated 16 McDonalds franchises throughout Pennsylvania.  A class of current and former McDonalds' hourly employees brought suit against the Muellers and alleged violations of the Pennsylvania Wage Payment and Collection Law ("WPCL").  These employees claimed the Muellers violated the WPCL by paying employee wages from November 2010 to July 2013 by way of mandatory JP Morgan Chase payroll debit cards, instead of by cash or check.  After the class was certified, the lower court denied the Muellers' motion for summary judgment.  Included in the court's order were instructions that the decision could be immediately appealed.  The Muellers subsequently appealed to the Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

Holding:  The Superior Court began its analysis with a review of Section 260.3 of the WPCL which holds that "The wages shall be paid in lawful money of the United States or check."  In this instance, the Court held the language of the statue was clear and therefore there was no need to look beyond the plain language of the WPCL.  As a result, under the language of the statute, a debit card is not "lawful money" or a "check" as provided by the WPCL.

The Court then turned to the Muellers' argument that a debit card is the functional equivalent of lawful money or a check.  However, the Court noted that the mandatory debit cards resulted in the hourly employees incurring fees, over the counter cash withdrawal charges, and other related charges...unless the employees complied with the JP Morgan Chase requirements.  Had the debit cards been voluntary, the Court held that could be an appropriate method of wage payment.  However, the Court held that until the language of the WPCL is altered, mandatory payroll debit cards did not comply with the statute and were therefore improper.

Judgment:  The Superior Court of Pennsylvania affirmed the lower court's ruling and held that under Pennsylvania law, an employer cannot mandate that hourly wages be paid via payroll debit cards to its employees.

The Takeaway:  This was one of the more succinct opinions I have read in some time.  Since the statute was clear on its face, there was no need to look beyond the plain meaning of what the statute actually stated:  "The wages shall be paid in lawful money of the United States or check."  Interesting to note the Court differentiated between mandatory and voluntary payroll debit cards on the grounds that employees who voluntarily chose to be paid via payroll debit cards could be lawful.  However, under the language of the WPCL, as written, there simply was no argument for the Muellers to base their claim.  As always, the laws can vary by state...so double check the laws in your jurisdiction to see how mandatory payroll debit cards are handled. 

Majority Opinion Judge:  Judge Lazarus

Date:  October 21, 2016

Opinion:  hr.cch.com/eld/SicilianoMueller102116.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