(CN) — The California Supreme Court on Monday agreed that workers who are stuck in their cars and trucks for as long as 30 minutes to go through security at their jobs should get paid for their time.
The state's top court resolved this question at the request of the Ninth Circuit in a class action brought by employees at a solar plant in rural California.
In its clarification of three elements of California's applicable wage order, the court rejected the argument that the time an employee has to drive on their employers premises between the security gate to the parking lot — which in the case of the solar plant could be 10 to 15 minutes — counted as hours worked. That time, however, could be compensable as "employer-mandated travel."
The court also agreed workers should be paid for their "unpaid meal breaks" if they aren't allowed to leave the employer's premises or a designated area and they can't engage in otherwise feasible personal activities.
Peter Dion-Kindem, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said the court "got it right." He expects the Ninth Circuit to send the case back to trial judge in San Jose, California, to let the case, filed on behalf of about 1,000 workers, proceed in light of today's decision.
The class action was first filed in 2018 on behalf of construction workers and electricians at the California Flats Solar Project in Central California. The project is located on the privately owned Jack Ranch, which is home to two endangered species.
The presence of the endangered species meant biologists needed to inspect the roads each morning before workers could enter the site, and also required workers to use only one access road on the property while driving no more than 20 miles per hour.
As a result, the workers for CSI Electrical Contractors said long lines formed at the site's security checkpoint each morning when they arrived and when they left at the end of day, when their cars and trucks were inspected, according to Monday's ruling, for stolen tools and endangered species.
The state's top court in its analysis expanded on its previous ruling that determined the time Apple store employees spend on the company's premises to have their bags checked before they can leave counts as hours worked. The difference in the situation of the solar plant's workers is that they were waiting in their own cars and trucks while on the employer's site.
"An employee in his personal vehicle may be subject to his employer’s control within the meaning of the wage order if sufficient indicia of control are present," Associate Justice Goodwin Liu wrote in the court's unanimous decision which ultimately determined that the contracting company did exert control over its employees during the checks.
The extent of the security check process — which involved not only scanning security badges, but also inspection of the vehicle — differentiated it from ordinary traffic congestion, Liu said.
He added, "compliance with CSI’s exit procedure was strictly required for every employee. Further, like the employees in Frlekin, Huerta remained confined to the employer’s premises until he completed the exit procedure; the procedure was thus an 'onsite employer-controlled activity.'"
The court declined to go as far as agreeing with the workers that the various restrictions imposed on them while driving on the access road between the security gate and the parking lot amounted to the kind of control that made that part of their drive count as work for which they are entitled to their hourly wages.
"The rules at issue are designed to ensure safe, lawful and orderly conduct while traveling on the employer’s premises," Liu wrote. "Such rules are necessary and appropriate in virtually every workplace."
According to the court's decision, the plaintiff's line of reasoning could lead to the conclusion that any time an employee spends on the employer’s premises, including the time it may take to find a parking space, to walk between a parking lot and worksite or to wait for an elevator in a tall building at the start of the day should be compensated as time worked.
The ruling, however, did leave open the possibility that if the workers were instructed to be at the security check for an "employment-related reason," other than just accessing the worksite, the time they spent driving from the check point to the parking lot could be compensable as employer-mandated travel.
The court also agreed that, even if the workers' collective bargaining agreement entitled them to only an unpaid 30-minute lunch break, they were entitled to get paid for their time in cases where the employer doesn't allow them to leave the worksite and they have to remain in a designated area during their break.
Attorneys for CSI Electrical Contractors didn't immediately respond to a request for comment on the ruling.
Follow @edpettersson
Subscribe to Closing Arguments
Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.
