Skip to main content

An Employer Policy of Rounding An Employee's Work Time is Lawful


Corbin v. Time Warner Entertainment-Advance/Newhouse Partnership - Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals


Facts:  Andre Corbin ("Corbin") worked for Time Warner at one of its call centers in California.  After May 4, 2010, employees were to use an online timekeeping system to keep track of their hours worked.  At the time, Time Warner had a "rounding" policy in place.  As a result, all employees (including Corbin) had their clock-ins and clock outs rounded to the nearest quarter hour.  Since the implementation of the timekeeping system, Corbin gained compensation or broke even 58% of the time.  However, based upon an agreement by both Corbin and Time Warner, as a result of the rounding policy, Corbin lost $15.02 in wages from May 5, 2010 to his resignation on June 15, 2011.  

Corbin subsequently filed a claim on the grounds that Time Warner's rounding policy deprived him of the full amount of his earned wages (specifically, overtime compensation).  The district court granted summary judgment in favor of Time Warner and Corbin subsequently appealed.

Holding:  The Court of Appeals noted that federal rounding rules allow an employer to round employees' time to the nearest five minutes, one-tenth, or quarter hour, as long as the rounding does not result (over time) in a failure to compensate employees for time worked.  California has applied the federal rounding rule to rounding claims under California law.  While Corbin had argued that any failure to pay employees for any time worked caused by the rounding rule was a violation of state and federal law, the Court of Appeals disagreed.  As the Court held, requiring rounding to be neutral for each pay period for all employees would "gut the effectiveness" of using rounding because it would require employers to "unround" time each pay period to ensure neutrality.  In doing so, the Court held this would invalidate the long approved rounding method as an acceptable form of timekeeping.

Judgment:  The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court's granting of summary judgment in favor of Time Warner on the grounds that the employer's policy of rounding an employee's work time to the nearest quarter hour was lawful.

The Takeaway:  This was an interesting case, in so much that it was the first published opinion from the Ninth Circuit (or any federal appeals court for that matter) on the issue of rounding.  As others have noted, I think the Court got it right here with its "common sense" approach to the matter.  The facts established that the rounding policy of Time Warner was automatic and not subject to oversight or editing by any manager.  This is important to note as the Court continually turned to the fact that the purpose of the rounding rule was effective on a broad scale, given the neutral application of the rounding rule.  

Many employees would likely agree with Corbin's argument that the rounding policy had an established negative impact (based upon the facts of this case) and therefore was an unlawful practice because it withheld wages from him.  However, I think readers need look no further than the Court's reliance upon the holding that the rounding policy (of Time Warner, in this case) was neutral on its face and as applied to Corbin.  The fact that Time Warner was not consciously choosing to withhold wages from Corbin or intentionally taking steps to "doctor" the time to prevent Corbin from earning a full wage for all hours worked is what this case turned upon.  This is a matter of the Court looking at the laws in place, the neutral application of Time Warner's rounding policy, and subsequently reaching the proper conclusion that there was no violation of federal or state law.

Majority Opinion Judge:  Judge Bybee

Date:  May 2, 2016

Opinion:  https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwi-_NeCwunMAhWDax4KHRQ_DtcQFggxMAM&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcdn.ca9.uscourts.gov%2Fdatastore%2Fopinions%2F2016%2F05%2F02%2F13-55622.pdf&usg=AFQjCNHcZl0t4HCMGGO7lzooi1jbqSjSKQ&sig2=7bYU0CZS-r6Jp2cNgZ9rVQ&bvm=bv.122676328,d.dmo

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