LOS ANGELES — A California court of appeals has been asked to reverse a $90 million award in a class action rest break violation decision. ABM Industries Inc., a facilities management company, was accused of denying security guards uninterrupted meal breaks and failing to compensate them for their time. In its appeal, the company claimed the lower court misinterpreted the state’s rest break requirements and the $90 million award was “absurd.”
The Rest Break Claim
In 2005, Jennifer Augustus, the lead plaintiff, filed the first complaint in this action against American Commercial Security Services Inc., a subsidiary of ABM. Augustus filed on behalf of herself and other similarly situated security guards. In the end, more than 14,000 current and former ABM security guards were included in the consolidated class action. Augustus claimed the company’s policy of requiring security guards to carry radios during their breaks required the security guards to remain “on call” during their breaks. Under California law, breaks must be duty free in order for the employer to avoid paying the employees for their time.
In February 2012, the guards filed a motion for summary judgment, believing there was enough evidence already presented and a trial was unnecessary. At that time they requested $103 million in damages. The court granted the summary judgment in July 2012, but reduced the damages, which covered 10 years of violations, to $89.7 million.
The lower court granted the summary judgment based on the fact that the required radios or cell phones allowed the company the control and option to call the employee back to work and cut their break short. According to the lower court, it did not matter whether the guards were called back. ABM was found to have violated state law because an employer must, according to state case law, relieve employees of all duties while on break to comply with state law.
The Appeal
Both during the lower court proceedings and on appeal, ABM noted that not all of the security guards were called back to work during their breaks and, in many cases, the guards who had their breaks cut short were allegedly allowed to take a new, complete replacement break. If the security guards did get a complete replacement break, ABM could have a good claim for a reversal, at least for those who received the new breaks. For now, ABM and the security guards will have to wait for the court of appeals’ decision.
In many cases, overtime and wage claims are very dependent on the details and specifics of what occurred, or did not occur. If you feel you denied proper wages and overtime, contact our experienced team of overtime pay lawyers today. Complete our Free Unpaid Overtime Case Review form or call us at (855) 754-2795 to discuss your situation. If we accept your case under our No Fee Promise, there will be no legal fees or costs unless you receive a settlement.