California’s highest state court held that the FLSA de minimis doctrine does not apply under state law, which would have excused employers from paying workers for small amounts of time that are difficult to record.
A former Dallas Cowboys cheerleader is suing the football franchise under the FLSA and Equal Pay Act, alleging overtime wage violations and unequal pay compared to the team’s mascot despite substantially similar job duties.
The Supreme Court of California heard oral argument in Troester v. Starbucks Corporation, addressing whether employers must compensate employees for de minimis periods of time before and after their shifts.
In a landmark decision, the California Supreme Court adopted a new test that assumes workers are employees for purposes of claims under the Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Orders, unless the entity can show that the worker is free from its control, performs work outside the usual course of the entity’s business, and is customarily engaged in an independently established occupation.
On Monday, the United States Supreme Court issued an opinion analyzing the scope of an exemption under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) for salesmen primarily engaged in selling or servicing automobiles. The Court’s opinion, however, will most likely have implications for other exemptions under the FLSA beyond just this one exemption.