Frlekin v. Apple, Inc.
- Case Date: 6/15/2018
- Project Name: Reining in the Plaintiffs' Bar
On June 15, 2018, WLF asked the California Supreme Court to clarify that an employer need not pay an employee for the time she spends using an optional perk or service the employer provides its employees. The case is before the California high court on a certified question from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. That question turns on the meaning of “hours worked” under California’s Wage Order No. 7, which requires an employer to pay each employee for all time the employee spends “subject to the employer’s control” or that the employer “suffers or permits” the employee to “work.” WLF’s amicus brief argued that because adopting the plaintiffs’ construction of the wage order would render it unconstitutionally vague, the court should avoid that interpretation. And given employers’ reasonable reliance on earlier California court decisions construing the order, if the court adopts the plaintiffs’ view it should impose that new meaning on employers only going forward.
|Awaiting oral argument.|
More Information and Downloads:
6/15/2018: Download Merits Brief