LOS ANGELES - Walmart current and former workers have won class certification in California over claims the giant retail company failed to pay wages when they were off the clock but on the premises.
The class action, which will be heard in federal court in the Central District of California, centers largely on the failure to pay for time spent going through security checks, for overtime and meal breaks at the company's distribution center in Chino Hills.
This certification of a wage and hours class action comes just weeks after a landmark decision by the California Supreme Court, in Troester vs. Starbucks, that the federal "de minimis" rule does not apply when considering suits under the state's labor laws.
The long-established 'de minimis' rule allows employers to defend against claims of non-payment if the time spent working off the clock is so small as to be irrelevant, usually thought to be less than 10 to 15 minutes.
But one employment law expert, who has closely followed the Troester case, said the Walmart decision appears to have been largely written prior to the publication of the July 26 Supreme Court opinion.
Indeed, said Anthony Zaller, of the Zaller Law Firm of Segundo, the only reference to the 'de minimis' rule was to effectively dismiss it as a consideration when weighing whether to certify the class.
It is mentioned, Zaller told the Northern California Record, only to state that it may be considered when arguments are made over the merits of the case, suggesting, he said, that the presiding Judge Andre Birotte may not have been aware of the Troester case, or that it was written prior to its publication.
Judge Birotte certified the class because he found there were enough individuals with common cause and with the same or similar grievances. The action is broken into various sub-classes, all but one of which were certified.
In this case and in others, the loss of the "de minimis' defense will likely have an impact as it was "huge" for employers, and its rejection by the Supreme Court puts them in a "difficult position," said Zaller.
"If the courts do not recognize 'de minimis' it is going to open up a lot of these claims and probably make it easier to certify," Zaller said. "'De minimis' is a pretty powerful doctrine, and wage and hours cases will be a lot harder to defend."
The Supreme Court, in the Troester decision, did leave open the possibility employers can make an argument if the time worked is irregular and small, said Zaller.
In the Walmart case, Chelsea Hamilton, the lead plaintiff on behalf of the class, claims workers at the Chino Hills fulfillment center were denied compensation in violation of various California labor codes and its Unfair Competition Law.
They claim the company failed to pay wages for all hours worked, including during security checks, overtime wages, provide meal periods, rest breaks, final wages, and accurate itemized wage statements
Apart from the rest break sub class, the judge certified the class, which, according to the court papers, involves approximately 3,800 workers at the Chino Hills facility from 2013 to the present.