Augustus v. ABM Security Services, Inc.

Case Updates

The petition for rehearing was denied.

The U.S. Chamber and National Association of Manufacturers filed an amicus letter urging the California Supreme Court to grant the petition for rehearing and, at a minimum, hold that its new interpretation of the rest break requirement does not apply retroactively.

John A. Taylor, Jr., Felix Shafir and Shane H. McKenzie of Horitz & Levy, LLP represented the U.S. Chamber of Commerce as co-counsel to the U.S. Chamber Litigation Center.

Ruling against employers, the California Supreme Court held that, "Given the practical realities of rest periods, an employer cannot satisfy its obligations” under the wage order “while requiring that employers remain on call."

In its brief, the U.S. Chamber urged the California Supreme Court to reverse a trial court decision concluding that California law bars employers from requiring that employees be reachable on rest breaks. The brief argued that remaining on call during a short break is not “work” under the statutory text as interpreted in light of relevant Industrial Wage Commission orders, and that holding that all on-call rest breaks are unlawful based on the mere possibility that an employee might be interrupted would be unworkable and undesirable.

The Chamber filed the brief jointly with the National Association of Manufacturers.

John A. Taylor, Jr., Felix Shafir and Shane H. McKenzie of Horitz & Levy, LLP represented the U.S. Chamber of Commerce as co-counsel to the U.S. Chamber Litigation Center.