Tag Archives: DLSE

Under Wage Order 5, On Duty Meal Periods Must Be At Least 30 Minutes in Length

By way of background, in Palacio v. Jan & Gail’s Care Homes, Inc. (2015) 242 Cal.App.4th 1133, the Fifth District Court of Appeal considered the interplay between subdivisions 11(A) and 11(E) of Wage Order No. 5. Subdivision 11(A) allows employers and employees to agree that meal periods will be on duty and to revoke these … Continue Reading

Looking Back and Looking Forward: Retroactivity and Expansion of the California Independent Contractor Test

In April 2018, the California Supreme Court issued its ruling in Dynamex Operations West v. Superior Court (2018) 4 Cal. 5th 903, 916-17 and set forth the standards for determining independent contractor status for purposes of the California Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Orders. The Court presumed that a worker is an employee unless he or … Continue Reading

Calculating Overtime Value of Flat-Sum Bonus Must Be Based on Actual Non-Overtime Hours Worked, California High Court Holds

The California Supreme Court has held that, under state law, when an employee earns a flat sum bonus during a pay period, the overtime pay rate will be calculated using the actual number of non-overtime hours worked by the employee during the pay period. Alvarado v. Dart Container Corp., 2018 Cal. LEXIS 1123 (Cal. Mar. … Continue Reading

California Court of Appeal Affirms Expense Reimbursement Award to Misclassified Employees

Four drivers who transported cargo from the Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles were misclassified as independent contractors and subjected to illegal paycheck deductions, a California Court of Appeal has held.  Garcia et al. v. Seacon Logix, Inc., No. B248227 (July 16, 2015) (unpublished).  This case reiterates a simple, yet important principle of employment … Continue Reading

California Department of Industrial Relations and Labor Commissioner Champion “Wage Theft Is A Crime” Campaign

Last year the California Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) and the Department of Labor Standards Enforcement (DLSE) initiated a campaign, entitled “Wage Theft is a Crime,” to educate California workers about the complexities of California’s wage laws. DIR Director Christine Baker stated that the “department’s mission is to protect California’s workers with comprehensive labor laws … Continue Reading

New California Paid Sick Leave FAQs From the DLSE

The California Division of Labor Standards & Enforcement (“DLSE”) has published additional FAQs regarding California’s new Paid Sick Leave law.  These FAQs, dated January 2015, can be found here.  Below is a summary of the DLSE’s FAQs: The Wage Theft Prevention Act Notice (“Notice”):  The new Paid Sick Leave law is clear that employees hired … Continue Reading

California Labor Commissioner Addresses State Paid Sick Leave Requirements

The Division of Labor Standards Enforcement’s website has been updated to include Frequently Asked Questions on California’s new Paid Sick Leave law, as well as a revised Wage Theft Prevention Act Notice and workplace poster. Both the Wage Theft Prevention Act Notice and workplace poster are effective January 1, 2015, even though the entitlement to … Continue Reading

Wage Theft Protection Act of 2011: DLSE Finally Released Form Notice and Frequently Asked Questions

The California Division of Labor Standards Enforcement ("DLSE") has released a Frequently Asked Questions and a form notice that is compliant with the new California Wage Theft Prevention Act of 2011.  Effective January 1, 2012, the Act requires employers to provide many new employees with written notice that details their rates of pay, employer name … Continue Reading

A California Appellate Court Creates a New Test for Sabbaticals

For the first time, a California appellate court has addressed when paid leave offered as a sabbatical is considered “paid vacation.” The distinction is important because California has long held that separating employees must be paid for any accrued “paid vacation," whereas leave granted as part of a true sabbatical may be forfeited if not used … Continue Reading

New Case Provides More Flexibility for Employers Crafting Commission Plans

In a recent pro-employer decision, the California Court of Appeals held that California’s exemption from overtime requirements for commissioned employees applied to a car sales consultant and the decision provided flexibility for employers when crafting commission plans. Areso v. Carmax, Inc., 195 Cal. App. 4th 996 (Cal. App. 2d Dist. 2011). In Areso, the plaintiff received a … Continue Reading