Following the California Supreme Court’s remand of Naranjo v. Spectrum Security Services, Inc., the California Court of Appeal in that same case held that the defendant-employer had not committed “knowing and intentional” violations of the wage statement statute by not including meal period premiums on the wage statements and had not “willfully” paid all wages due at the end of employment by not previously paying meal period premiums that were owed. The Court held that, although the employer did not prevail on its defense that employees in a certified class action were subject to valid on-duty meal period agreements, neither waiting time penalties (capped at 30 days’ of wages at the daily rate of pay for each former employee) nor wage statement penalties (capped at $4,000 per employee) could be imposed against the employer given the good faith dispute that any meal period premiums were owed.
Recent Updates
- New Jersey’s Employer Response Portal: What You Need to Know
- Final Rules Dismantle Civil Rights Protections for Minorities, Women, Individuals with Disabilities, and Veterans
- U.S. Court of Appeals Decision Highlights Retaliation Risks During Employee Separations
- Fast Facts About the DOL Proposed Rule for Electronic Disclosures for ERISA Group Health Plans
- San Francisco Amends its Fair Chance Ordinance