tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5195531732750182551.post1284089201474770653..comments2024-01-10T03:22:18.004-08:00Comments on Bryan Schwartz Law: Wage-and-hour class actions: The sky is falling (or is it?) After Brinker and Duran, what lies ahead?Bryan Schwartz Lawhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10509090710437656270noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5195531732750182551.post-91399342719454703322013-01-07T22:06:16.885-08:002013-01-07T22:06:16.885-08:00Great news: on December 12, 2012, the Supreme Cour...Great news: on December 12, 2012, the Supreme Court depublished the Lamps Plus and Hernandez v. Chipotle cases. This is, I hope, a very significant indication of how the Court is viewing meal/rest class actions and the developing jurisprudence in this area and - optimistically - foreshadows good things in the important Duran v. USBank case.Bryan Schwartz Lawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10509090710437656270noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5195531732750182551.post-88095245315852072252012-12-19T10:16:24.761-08:002012-12-19T10:16:24.761-08:00Note the December 19th posting: Bradley v. Network...Note the December 19th posting: Bradley v. Networkers International on remand yielded a strong result for workers, granting class cert. in a meal/rest period case involving misclassified independent contractors where there was no policy to provide meal/rest periods:<br /><br />http://bryanschwartzlaw.blogspot.com/2012/12/normal-0-false-false-false-en-us-x-none.htmlBryan Schwartzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09080504251380216224noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5195531732750182551.post-68434990626917623512012-09-28T18:09:17.390-07:002012-09-28T18:09:17.390-07:00Another grant-and-hold case yielded a similarly un...Another grant-and-hold case yielded a similarly unhelpful result. In an unpublished case, Brinkley v. Public Storage, Inc., 2012 WL 3126606 (August 2, 2012), the Second District Court of Appeal upheld summary adjudication as to the employees' meal and rest period claims. Fortunately, the case is not citable. However, the Court found that the storage facility managers scheduled breaks at their discretion, and thus could not assert that - notwithstanding compliant published policies - rest and meal breaks were not made available/provided. Significantly as to meal periods, the Court noted that the plaintiffs previously failed to assert the argument that the meal periods were "on duty" because they could not leave the storage facility premises, and thus waived the argument. It seems the latter - that their meal periods were on duty/not free from the employer's control - would have been the workers' best argument post-Brinker.<br />Bryan Schwartz Lawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10509090710437656270noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5195531732750182551.post-77256009195995358112012-09-28T17:56:18.153-07:002012-09-28T17:56:18.153-07:00Note the September 19th posting: Iskanian was gran...Note the September 19th posting: Iskanian was granted review!Bryan Schwartz Lawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10509090710437656270noreply@blogger.com