Wage and Hour Case Notes

• Jurisdiction: California,United States
• Author: By Lois M. Kosch
• Publication year: 2016
• Citation: Vol. 30 No. 6

Wage and Hour Case Notes

By Lois M. Kosch

Lois M. Kosch is a partner at Wilson Turner Kosmo. She specializes in counseling and representing employers in all aspects of employment law and litigation. Ms. Kosch is a former member of the Labor and Employment Law Section's Executive Committee.

California Supreme Court Holds Employees Who Retire Are Entitled to Waiting Time Penalties Pursuant to Labor Code Section 203

McLean v. State of California, 1 Cal. 5th 615 (2016)

Employee, a retired deputy attorney general, sued her employer, the State of California, on behalf of herself and a class of former state employees, who, having resigned or retired, did not receive their final wages within the time required by statute.

Labor Code section 203 requires an employer to make prompt payment of final wages when employees "quit" or are "discharged." The trial court sustained the employer's demurrer, concluding the employee had not stated a claim for statutory penalties under Labor Code section 203 because she "retired" from her job. The court of appeal reversed, holding that Labor Code sections 202 and 203 apply when employees "quit to retire."

Applying the usual rules of statutory interpretation, the supreme court upheld the court of appeal's ruling. In particular, the supreme court noted that the Labor Code does not define the term "quit," and further concluded that the ordinary meaning of the word "quit" is broad enough to encompass a voluntary departure from employment for any reason. The supreme court also held that the legislative history of section 202 and practical considerations reinforced the conclusion that the application of the prompt payment provisions of sections 202 and 203 do not turn on the nature of the employee's post-employment plans. Accordingly, sections 202 and 203 apply to persons who retire from their employment, just as they apply to those who voluntarily leave their employment for other reasons.

Order Compelling Arbitration of Individual Claims and Staying Private Attorneys General Act Claim is Not Appealable

Young v. RemX, Inc., 2 Cal. App. 5th 630 (2016)

In this putative wage and hour class action, plaintiff alleged the employer failed to pay, at the time of termination, all final wages earned. For this alleged failure, the plaintiff brought a claim under Labor Code sections 201 through 203, and a representative claim pursuant to the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA), seeking civil penalties on her own behalf and on behalf of other aggrieved...