The California Supreme Court in Augustus v. ABM Security Services, Inc. has ruled Industrial Welfare Commission wage orders and the Labor Code prohibit employers from placing employees “on-call” or “on-duty” during required rest periods. The case arose from ABM Security Services’ requirement that its guards keep their radios and pagers on, remain vigilant, and respond when needs arose, such as escorting tenants to parking lots, notifying building managers of mechanical problems, and responding to emergency situations, during their rest periods.

ABM security guards sued ABM and were granted summary judgment for over $90 million in damages for this practice. ABM appealed and the Court of Appeal reversed. Plaintiffs then appealed to the California Supreme Court. The California Supreme reversed and reinstated the award. It held employers must “relinquish any control over how employees spend their break time, and relieve their employees of all duties –– including the obligation that an employee remain on call.”

In light of this case, it is imperative employers contact legal counsel to assist them in revamping their rest period and “on-call” policies.

The information presented is not intended to be, and does not constitute, “legal advice.” Because each situation varies, and only brief summary information is provided here, you should not use this information as a basis for action unless you have independently verified with your own counsel that it applies to your particular situation.