Are your bus rides to work compensable hours in California? (California No. S073725)

Have you ever felt frustrated when your employer required you to use company transportation but didn't compensate you for the time spent traveling? You're not alone; many employees face similar challenges with travel time not being considered as part of their working hours. Fortunately, the California Supreme Court's decision in Morillion v. Royal Packing Company offers a solution, affirming that such travel time can indeed be compensable. If you're dealing with this issue, reading through this landmark case might provide you with the guidance you need.

No. S073725 Case Situation

Case Overview

Specific Circumstances

In California, a legal dispute arose involving a company and its agricultural employees. The company required its workers to assemble at designated parking lots each day and then ride on company-provided buses to their actual work site in the fields. At the end of the workday, the employees were transported back to the parking lots. The employees were not allowed to use their own transportation to the work site, which was a rule strictly enforced by the company. This policy led to a disagreement regarding whether the time spent traveling on these buses should be considered as compensable working hours.

Plaintiff’s Argument

The plaintiffs in this case were the agricultural employees of the company. They argued that their time spent traveling on the employer-provided buses should be compensated as “hours worked.” They believed that since they were under the control of the employer during this travel time, it qualified as part of their work hours. They sought compensation for the time spent assembling at the departure points, riding the bus to the fields, waiting for the bus after work, and the return trip on the bus.

Defendant’s Argument

The defendant, the company, contended that the travel time on the buses should not be considered compensable work time. They argued that according to federal guidelines, travel to and from the work site is generally not considered as hours worked unless the employees perform work during that time. The company maintained that the bus rides were merely a convenience for the workers and did not constitute controlled work time.

Judgment Outcome

The court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, the agricultural employees. It was determined that the time spent traveling on the employer-provided buses was indeed compensable as “hours worked” under California’s Industrial Welfare Commission wage order. This decision was based on the understanding that the workers were subject to the control of the employer during these bus rides, even though they were not performing their regular work duties. As a result, the company was required to compensate the employees for the travel time spent on the buses.

No. S073725 Relevant Statutes

Cal.Code Regs., tit. 8, § 11140

This section defines “hours worked” as the time an employee is under the control of an employer. It includes all the time the employee is allowed or required to work, even if not actively working. The key phrase here is “subject to the control of an employer,” meaning if an employee is required to do something by their employer, that time counts as “hours worked.” For example, if employees are required to travel on employer-provided buses, they are under the employer’s control during that travel time.

Wage Order No. 14-80

Wage Order No. 14-80 applies specifically to agricultural employees. It expands on the definition of “hours worked” by stating that time spent traveling on employer-mandated transportation is compensable. This means if an employer, like Royal Packing Company, mandates employees to use specific transportation methods, the time spent in transit is considered work time. The order emphasizes that employees don’t need to be performing active work tasks to be paid; it’s the employer’s control over their actions that matters.

The order also addresses the issue of what constitutes being “suffered or permitted to work.” This includes any time an employee works beyond what is required, such as voluntary overtime, if the employer knows or should know about it. This ensures that employees are compensated for all work-related activities, not just those strictly scheduled by the employer.

No. S073725 Judgment Criteria

Principled Interpretation

Cal.Code Regs., tit. 8, § 11140

Under the regulations of California Code, Title 8, Section 11140, the definition of “hours worked” is interpreted to mean the time during which an employee is under the control of the employer. This includes all the time the employee is required by the employer to remain at a certain place or perform certain tasks, regardless of whether the employee is actively working during that period. Essentially, if the employer dictates when and where the employee must be, that time is considered compensable.

Wage Order No. 14-80

This wage order specifically governs agricultural workers and mirrors the definition in the regulations by stating that “hours worked” include any time an employee is subject to the employer’s control. It emphasizes that employees do not need to be actively engaged in work tasks to be considered on the clock, as long as they are under the employer’s directive.

Exceptional Interpretation

Cal.Code Regs., tit. 8, § 11140

In exceptional cases, the regulation might be interpreted to exclude time that is not directly under the employer’s control, such as voluntary activities performed by the employee without the employer’s direction or knowledge. This could include unauthorized overtime where the employer did not suffer or permit the work to occur.

Wage Order No. 14-80

Exceptions under Wage Order No. 14-80 are limited and would generally pertain to situations where the employee is free to use the time for personal pursuits without employer restrictions, such as true break times where employees can leave the premises and are not required to remain available for work.

Applied Interpretation

In the Morillion v. Royal Packing Company case, the court applied the principled interpretation of the relevant laws and wage orders. The decision was grounded in the understanding that the employees were subject to the employer’s control during the compulsory travel time on the employer-provided buses. The court highlighted that because the employer dictated the travel method and timing, the time spent on these buses was compensable. This interpretation aligns with the principle that employer control over an employee’s time, even outside traditional working hours, mandates compensation. This approach was chosen over any exceptional interpretation because the employer’s control was explicit and substantial.

Compulsory Travel Time Resolution Method

No. S073725 Resolution Method

In this case, the plaintiffs successfully argued that their compulsory travel time should be compensated as “hours worked” under Wage Order No. 14-80. The court concluded that because the employer, Royal Packing Company, required the employees to travel on company-provided buses and prohibited the use of their own transportation, the travel time was compensable due to the control exerted by the employer. For employees in similar situations, pursuing litigation proved to be the correct method, especially considering the collective nature of the class action lawsuit, which justified the engagement of legal representation. The complexity and scope of the case suggest that individuals facing similar circumstances should consider obtaining professional legal counsel to effectively navigate the nuances of labor law and maximize the likelihood of a favorable outcome.

Similar Case Resolution Method

Different Meeting Points

If employees are required to meet at different points each day, making the logistics of travel more cumbersome, it may be beneficial to seek a mediated settlement before pursuing litigation. Engaging in a dialogue with the employer to establish a consistent meeting point could resolve the issue without the need for court intervention.

Optional Bus Use

In cases where the employer provides buses but does not mandate their use, employees should evaluate whether litigation is necessary. Since the requirement of bus usage is a critical factor, employees might find more success in negotiating directly with the employer or using alternative dispute resolution methods to address any grievances.

Independent Commute Allowed

When employees have the option to commute independently and choose their mode of transportation, litigation may not be the ideal approach. Instead, focusing on negotiating flexible work arrangements or transportation benefits with the employer could yield better results, as the element of employer control is diminished.

Employer-Provided Alternatives

If an employer offers multiple transportation options, such as a shuttle or carpooling service, and allows employees to select their preference, litigation may not be warranted. Employees should first attempt to engage in dialogue with the employer to enhance the convenience or efficiency of these options, potentially involving employee representatives or a mediator to facilitate discussions.

FAQ

What is Hours Worked

“Hours worked” refers to the time an employee is under the control of the employer, including time they are required to be on duty or at a workplace, even if not actively working.

Who is Under Control

Employees are considered under control when they are directed, commanded, or restrained by their employer in such a way that prevents them from using time freely for their own purposes.

Is Travel Time Paid

Yes, if the travel time is compulsory and under the employer’s control, such as traveling on an employer-provided bus that employees are required to use, it is considered compensable.

Can I Use My Car

If the employer requires the use of specific transportation, like company buses, employees cannot use personal vehicles without potentially facing penalties or losing compensation for that travel time.

What is Wage Order

A wage order is a regulation issued by the Industrial Welfare Commission specifying wages, hours, and working conditions for specific industries or occupations within California.

Are All Buses Required

Not all buses are required. If an employer provides transportation but does not mandate its use, the travel time on such transportation may not be compensable.

How is Overtime Calculated

Overtime is calculated based on hours worked beyond the standard workday or workweek and must include compensable travel time if it meets the criteria set by the wage order.

Is Waiting Time Paid

Waiting time is compensable if the employee is subject to the employer’s control during such waiting periods, like waiting for a company bus at a designated location.

What if I am Late

If an employee is late and misses required transportation, they may face a loss of wages for that day or other penalties as defined by employer policies.

How to Handle Disputes

Disputes should be handled by reviewing the relevant wage order, consulting with a labor law professional, or contacting the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement for guidance.

Refused request in California. What happened next?