In re Lamps Plus Overtime Cases 5/10/11 CA2/8

SUPREME COURT CASES

Laws-info.com » Cases » California » Court of Appeal » 2011 » In re Lamps Plus Overtime Cases 5/10/11 CA2/8

State: California

Court: 1st District Court of Appeal 1st District Court of Appeal

Docket No: B220954

Case Date: 07/21/2011

Preview:Filed 5/10/11

CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION EIGHT

LAMPS PLUS OVERTIME CASES. ___________________________________ MARLON FLORES et. al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. LAMPS PLUS, INC., et al. Defendants and Respondents.

B220954 JCCP No. 4510 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC357662)

APPEAL from the order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Carl J. West, Judge. Affirmed. Krutcik & Georggin, James A. Krutcik, A. Nicholas Georggin, and Joo Hee Kershner for Plaintiffs and Appellants. Sidley Austin, Douglas R. Hart and Beth Ann Scheel for Defendants and Respondents.

SUMMARY Plaintiffs and appellants Marlon Flores, Hooman Khalili, and Ryan McGuinness appeal from the order denying their motion for class certification of their labor claims against Lamps Plus, Inc., Pacific Coast Lighting, Inc., and Lamps Plus Centennial, Inc. (Lamps Plus, or defendants). Because we conclude that employers must provide employees with breaks, but need not ensure employees take breaks, that individual disputes dominate all of plaintiffs claims, and the class representatives are inadequate, we hold the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion and therefore affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND 1. Facts. Lamps Plus is a retail lighting chain, employing thousands of nonmanagerial hourly employees in its 29 stores in California during the relevant period. Lamps Pluss corporate headquarters are in California. It has centralized timekeeping and payroll systems that are operated from headquarters, and all of its corporate policies and procedures are issued from headquarters. The Lamps Plus workforce includes managers-in-training, assistant managers, store managers, stockroom people, cashiers, and others performing office, display, cleaning, and sales duties. The number of employees and types of positions vary from store to store. All Lamps Plus employees are nonexempt, except the store managers. Even assistant managers are nonexempt hourly employees. All employees use the same timekeeping system. Lamps Plus has an employee handbook that includes a policy requiring meal and rest breaks. Its meal and rest break policy provides that its nonexempt employees "must" take an uninterrupted meal period of at least 45 minutes after not more than five hours of work. Employees are "entitled" to take a second meal period if they work more than 10 hours. "Employees are required to take [unpaid] meal periods, and should not eat at their desks or work stations." Nonexempt employees are "authorized and permitted" to take a 15-minute paid rest period "for every four hours, or major
2

fraction of four hours, that they work." The policy also provides for written waiver of the meal periods for employees working a shift of six hours or less, as well as written waiver of the second meal period for those employees working between 10- and 12hour shifts. Employees are required to sign an acknowledgment providing: "I acknowledge that I have received a copy of the Companys meal and rest break policy, and I acknowledge and I agree that I will comply with the policy. I further agree that if I am not provided with the meal and rest periods specified in the policy, I will contact Human Resources . . . ." Meal and rest periods are scheduled by the employees supervisor. Meal periods are logged in the timekeeping system, but rest periods are not. Lamps Plus uses a progressive discipline system for violations of the meal and rest period policy. Lamps Plus has a uniform procedure for payment of wages upon both voluntary and involuntary terminations, administered from headquarters. The procedures require that managers prepare and submit a termination report to Lamps Pluss central human resources department for processing. The last day worked by an employee is determined from the termination report. The payroll department is then responsible for transmitting the final paycheck to the employee. The paycheck is sent by courier to the employees store, or is sent by mail at the request of the employee. All three plaintiffs reported to the same manager at the same Lamps Plus store in San Rafael, which is only one of the 29 stores Lamps Plus operates in California. Marlon Flores (Flores) worked at Lamps Pluss San Rafael store as a full-time sales associate from January 2003 to July 2003, and as a part-time sales associate from August 2003 to December 2003. Hooman Khalili (Khalili) was briefly employed as a part-time stock person in the San Rafael Lamps Plus store between September 2003 and February 2004. During that time, Khalili worked a total of only 12 shifts. Ryan McGuinness (McGuinness) worked as a full-time sales associate at Lamps Pluss San Rafael store, from September 2003 to May 2005.

3

2.

Procedure. a. The operative complaint.

Flores, Khalili, and McGuinness (collectively plaintiffs) filed this lawsuit against Lamps Plus on their own behalf and on behalf of a putative class of similarly situated nonmanagerial employees. They allege Lamps Plus violated labor laws by denying meal and rest breaks, requiring off-the-clock work, failing to provide itemized wage statements, and failing to timely pay wages due upon termination. Their complaint states causes of action for: (1) failure to pay wages for all time worked; (2) failure to pay all overtime wages; (3) failure to pay minimum wages; (4) failure to provide rest breaks; (5) failure to provide meal breaks; (6) late payment of all accrued wages and compensation; (7) unfair business practices (Bus. & Prof. Code,

Download In re Lamps Plus Overtime Cases 5/10/11 CA2/8.pdf