Q: I WORK at a retail company and every employee is required to “pitch in” when it becomes busy. Stocking shelves, cleaning, and putting away merchandise are not part of my official duties but I’m told to do them anyway. Since I am paid per task that I finish, the extra work decreases my time to work on my official tasks. The extra work is not paid. My lunch breaks are also cut short because I have to help other employees attend to customers. Am I entitled to additional wages?
A: Under California law, employees should be paid for all hours worked. “Hours worked” means time spent by an employee performing activities that are controlled by and for the benefit of the employer, regardless of whether they are your “official” duties. Those hours are considered “work time” and must be paid by the employer. If the employer knows (or should have known) that the employee is working, and allows the employee to do it, the employee is entitled to pay.
Additionally, if employees are on lunch or rest breaks, but made to do work-related activities, then the employees should be paid for the interrupted or shortened breaks.
A big retail company catering to pet products, Petsmart, was sued by a group of employees for these similar issues. The lawsuit was filed in 2012 by Petsmart employees in Alameda County. The case was filed on behalf of groomers/pet stylists, grooming trainees, salon managers and other hourly employees.
According to reports, the employees claimed that they “were regularly required to perform nonproductive work such as stocking, cashiering, cleaning the grooming salon and prospecting for grooming customers, during which time they were prevented from earning piece-rate compensation.” Petsmart paid its groomers 50 percent of the net price of a grooming fee. However, PetSmart’s business practice states that if a customer does not like how their pet looks after being groomed, the customer does not have to pay. This results in the employees performing unpaid work.
Contrary to California law, the company also had a policy of allowing meal breaks only for workers who worked between six to eight hours, and employees who worked five consecutive hours were denied breaks. Employees claimed meal break violations were common because employees were forced to assist customers even when they had clocked out for their break.
The employees also claimed they often were forced to work through rest periods since the company did not compensate them for rest break time. This is also contrary to California law which requires that employees be provided at least 10 minutes of paid rest break for every four hours of work.
Additional claims by the employees include the company’s failure to reimburse them for the cost of grooming tools they were required to buy, failure to provide them with suitable seats to do their work, improper calculation of their vacation pay, and late payments of wages for discharged employees.
Rather than proceed to trial, the parties agreed to a settlement of $10 million, to be approved by the judge. The settlement will potentially affect 16,400 current and former employees in 132 stores.
No matter how big or busy the work place is, employers cannot deprive employees of their lawful rights to proper wages and uninterrupted breaks.
You are welcome to inquire about this topic and related issues with The Law Offices of C. Joe Sayas, Jr. All inquiries are confidential and at no-cost. You can contact the office at (818) 291-0088 or visit www.joesayaslaw.com.
***
The Law Offices of C. Joe Sayas, Jr. welcomes inquiries about this topic. All inquiries are confidential and at no-cost. Atty. Sayas’ Law Office is located at 500 N. Brand Blvd. Suite 980, Glendale, CA 91203. You can contact the office at (818) 291-0088 or visit www.joesayaslaw.com.
***
C. Joe Sayas, Jr., Esq. is trial attorney who has obtained several million dollar recoveries for his clients against employers and insurance companies. He has been selected as a Super Lawyer by the Los Angeles Magazine, featured in the cover of Los Angeles Daily Journal’s Verdicts and Settlements, and is a member of the Million Dollar-Advocates Forum.
