SAN DIEGO (Legal Newsline) - Sticking to its interpretation of the law unless the California Supreme Court decides otherwise, an appeals court ruled that labor lawsuits under the state Private Attorneys General Act needn’t meet the manageability requirements of other class actions.
California’s PAGA law deputizes private citizens to sue over labor violations in place of the state and therefore courts shouldn’t impose additional requirements upon them, California’s Fourth Appellate District Court said in a July 24 decision. The state Labor and Workforce Development Agency isn’t subject to a manageability requirement, the court observed.
Another appeals court ruled the other way on the same question, however, so the Fourth Circuit acknowledged it might end up having decided wrong. “Our Supreme Court is reviewing the issue and will resolve the split,’ the court said.
Nicole Woodworth sued Loma Linda University Medical Center in 2014, claiming a variety of wage and hour violations including rounding time to a tenth of an hour and providing a third rest period after 10 hours of work. She later amended her suit to add PAGA claims on behalf of other workers, but after several years of litigation the court dismissed the class claims, leaving only her case.
Woodworth appealed, and the Fourth Circuit revived some of her claims. On the tenth-of-an-hour rounding, Loma Linda presented expert testimony that the scheme was neutral because more than half of the center’s 10,000 employees were paid for more time than they worked. Woodworth argued it undercompensated employees working 12-hour shifts, however, and sought class certification for those workers only.
The appeals court ruled that because Loma Linda captured the exact time each employee worked, it can be sued for minutes individual workers weren’t paid under the rounding policy. The appeals court likewise reversed the trial court’s refusal to certify a class, saying several of the claims lent themselves to class treatment.
Claims that Loma Linda failed to provide itemized statements with nine categories of information can proceed, the appeals court ruled, as well as a “regular rate claim” for failure to include Christmas bonuses in wage calculations.
Woodworth also challenged the trial court’s refusal to strike deposition testimony by employees who displayed lack of knowledge about the case, including that it involved all employees, was based on PAGA or that it might invalidate an agreement under which employees could work 10- and 12-hour shifts without overtime. The appeals court upheld that ruling, saying the employees weren’t coerced to give testimony.