A 2018 appellate court decision will help you get employee travel time compensation right.
This is a question we get from employers a lot, “How do we compensate employees for travel time to the job site? The reason they’re asking is partly because of the lack of legislative guidance on the subject of travel pay. And it’s especially tricky when there’s not a fixed work site involved, as is often the case in the construction industry.
But thanks to a November 2018 California Appellate Court decision, we finally have some helpful guidance on compensable time for employees who are provided with company vehicles.
Listen to Lisa Ryan explain in this podcast.
Employee Travel Time Compensation: 2018 Appellate Court Decision Will Help You Get It Right
This is a question we get from employers a lot, “How do we compensate employees for travel time to the job site? The reason they’re asking is partly because of the lack of legislative guidance on the subject of travel pay. And it’s especially tricky when there’s not a fixed work site involved, as is often the case in the construction industry.
But thanks to a November 2018 California Appellate Court decision, we finally have some helpful guidance on compensable time for employees who are provided with company vehicles.
Travel Time: The Case of Hernandez v. Pacific Bell Telephone
In Hernandez, the court held that where a company policy provided technicians the option of bringing a company vehicle home, but did not require that they do so, the commute time to the first stop in the day was not compensable.
The decision also found that the incidental transporting of equipment and tools does not change this normal commute into compensable time. This ruling does not apply if the employee is required to transport heavy equipment, but could provide some needed protection against commute claims for employees who voluntarily agree to bring a company vehicle home for their personal convenience.
This decision goes further. It provides that even if a policy restricts employees from running errands to or from the job sites and prohibits employees from transporting others (e.g. kids), this does not meet the level of “employer control” required to make it compensable time.
Prior case law had found that if an employer policy is so restrictive as to limit an employee’s ability to run errands in a company vehicle, it could transform that commute time into compensable work time. The Hernandez decision is a great response to such arguments.
Keep the Workplace Working: What to Do
There are a variety of factors that could transform a normal commute into compensable time. But based on this decision, if the practice of bringing a company vehicle home is completely voluntary, placing restrictions on the use of that vehicle during a commute does not necessarily trigger the “hours worked” test.
And as with any travel practice, we strongly recommend that employers provide clear expectations related to travel and use of company vehicles through a well-drafted written Agreement with employees.
I’m Lisa Ryan. Thanks for listening. As a reminder, this podcast is focused on California law, so if you’re outside of our state you’ll need to do some research on your own or consult an attorney admitted to practice in your state. And of course, we want our listeners to understand that this podcast is for general informational purposes only and does not create an attorney / client relationship.
If you’d like specific guidance on this issue, we can help.
