At the request of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, the California Supreme Court addressed questions about the applicability of California law to plaintiff nonresident employees who worked both in California and in other states for defendant, a California-based employer.

Overview: corporation lawyers

The Supreme Court held that the California Labor Code's overtime provisions apply to work performed in California by nonresidents, such that overtime pay would be required for work in excess of eight hours per day or in excess of 40 hours per week. The relevant laws of each of the potentially affected jurisdictions were different, but the circumstances revealed no genuine basis for concluding a true conflict existed. The potentially affected jurisdictions did not have a legitimate interest in shielding the employer from the requirements of California wage law as to work performed in California. The general interest of the potentially affected jurisdictions in providing hospitable regulatory environments to businesses was not perceptibly impaired by requiring the employer to comply with California overtime law for work performed in California. The employer's alleged violations of the state's overtime law constituted potentially unlawful acts triggering liability under the state's Unfair Competition Law (UCL), Bus. & Prof. Code, § 17200 et seq. However, there was no basis for applying the UCL to plaintiffs' claims under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (FLSA).

Outcome

The California Labor Code's overtime provisions apply to claims for compensation for work performed in California, and the same claims can serve as predicates for claims under the UCL. However, claims for overtime compensation under the FLSA for performed in other states cannot serve as predicates for UCL claims.

Posted by: saimkhan at 04:52 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 280 words, total size 2 kb.