My Photo

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter

    September 2016

    Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
            1 2 3
    4 5 6 7 8 9 10
    11 12 13 14 15 16 17
    18 19 20 21 22 23 24
    25 26 27 28 29 30  

    « Murphy Decides OT Statutes of Limitation? | Main | Further Thoughts on Fireside Bank »



    I noticed the opinion also implies that reporting time and split shift pay are wages, and I assume, also subject to a three year statute of limitation. Is that your reading of it as well? Is that surprising or unremarkable?

    michael walsh

    The opinion reflected prior determinations that split shift pay and reporting time pay were wages. During the oral argument, the plaintiffs made the point that break pay was analogous to split shift pay and reporting time pay, which were wages, and therefore, break pay should be wages, too. So those parts of the opinion are not statements of new law.

    William Becker

    That is a good observation regaridng 206.5. Shortly prior to Murphy, we hashed this issue out at a mediation where I first learned that an employer had strong armed its current employees into releasing meal and rest period claims in exchange for payments of $100. I thought the releases were suspect even in the pre-Murphy environment. Now, they are even more questionable. I anticipate that this will be raised as an issue on class cert motion in the next few months. If the plaintiffs win this issue, I am certain that we will be before the court of appeals. I will follow up as matters develop.

    The comments to this entry are closed.

    Become a Fan

    AddThis Social Bookmark Button