Required To Work Off The Clock

[Jwd]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? california

I'm looking for advice on the following situation.

Employer wants employee to work off the clock, unpaid.
---Employee refuses
Employer threatens to fire employee
---Employee threatens to call Labor Board
Employer suspends employee for multiple days without pay.

---Employee returns to work after suspension.
Employer demands employee sign documents containing several FALSE allegations of misconduct.
---Employee refuses.
Employer threatens to fire employee if employee doesn't sign.
---Employee refuses and asks for copies of documents.
Employer refuses to provide copies and suspends employee for multiple days without pay.

---Employee returns to work.
Employer asks employee if they are ready to sign documents.
---Employee refuses to sign any false statement.
Employer terminates employee.

There is a witness to the fact that the employer wanted the employee to work off the clock and that the employer became angry when the employee refused but not witness to the following events. This witness is potentially unreliable as they are deathly afraid of losing their job. It is not uncommon for the employer to require employees to work off the clock but there is no documentary proof.

Is this something the Labor Board would take an interest in, seeing as how there is no concrete proof?
If the Labor Board did take up the matter what would they do?
What might be the best outcome for the terminated employee?

thank youWhat is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?

 

[PrinceCharming]

You should sue in court. Not only will you get your loss of wages, but you can add an additional amount called liquidated damages. After you file a complaint in court, you can file an order to show cause for an injuction to get your job back right away. In addition, for every time you worked off the clock, you are entitled to the full amount that you worked plus liquidated damages and overtime if applicable.

If you complain to the Department of Labor, you will get your job back and unpaid wages, but not liquidated damages.

You may have additional rights under your state law.

 

[ecmst12]

Since the employee did not do any work for which he was not paid, there is probably nothing the DOL can do. However it's also not very likely that a civil suit would be successful. Employee should have worked the requested hours and then, if he was not paid, filed a complaint with the DOL. Because then there would be proof of wrongdoing.

 

[Jwd]

Thanks for the responses.

Because the work would have been off the clock(specifically after clocking out for the day) there wouldn't have been any way to prove it actually occured. I suspected that without concrete proof this was simply a situation were the employee gets screwd. Under the circumstances and considering the behavior of the employer (just one example)I guess I'm better off persuing employment elswhere.

 

[justalayman]

you must document the time worked. Items such as duties performed, product produced, other employees around at the time.

Any info that would support the fact the employee was there at that time and obviously not paid as supported by their paycheck.

 

[cbg]

Because the work would have been off the clock(specifically after clocking out for the day) there wouldn't have been any way to prove it actually occured.

But that's the whole point. You don't HAVE to prove what hours were actually worked. Your employer has to prove that you didn't work the hours you said you did.

 

[Jwd]

I didn't know the burden of proof was on the employer. I guess it's to late for me but I will pass the information on to the employees that remain. One employee (a very hard worker) has so much work piled on top of them by the employer that not only do they have to work an hour or more off the clock every day (no overtime pay allowed) but they aren't able to take a lunch or any breaks. If the employee fails to complete their days assigned workload they are verbally abused and threatend with termination.

It really is a nightmare of a place to work. The owner/employer actually uses the current state of the economy and poor job market as part of his arsenal of threats and intimidation. If he knows you have a mortage to pay or a family to support he uses it against you and considers you fair game for abuse and threats. Fear of termination is rampant among the emplyees. And that's just the tip of the iceberg.

 

[pattytx]

How long ago did you leave the company? It very well may NOT be too late. California law also rpvoides for meal periods and rest breaks that, if not taken, throws a one-hour's pay penalty per violation.

This company needs to be taken to task.

 

[PrinceCharming]

I didn't know the burden of proof was on the employer. I guess it's to late for me but I will pass the information on to the employees that remain. One employee (a very hard worker) has so much work piled on top of them by the employer that not only do they have to work an hour or more off the clock every day (no overtime pay allowed) but they aren't able to take a lunch or any breaks. If the employee fails to complete their days assigned workload they are verbally abused and threatend with termination.

It really is a nightmare of a place to work. The owner/employer actually uses the current state of the economy and poor job market as part of his arsenal of threats and intimidation. If he knows you have a mortage to pay or a family to support he uses it against you and considers you fair game for abuse and threats. Fear of termination is rampant among the emplyees. And that's just the tip of the iceberg.

You obviously have no claim for the time worked off the clock, since you refused to do so.

It is NOT considered insubordination since the employer asked you illegally to wave your rights of getting paid for work performed.

Therefore, you have every right to sue for "loss of wages" and double that called "liquidated damages".

Loss of wages will cover the time period until you find another job. Be advised that if you do NOT put in good faith to find another job, you may lose your claim.

Don't forget to collect unemployment.

Your state may have additional rights.

 

[Jwd]

I was terminated in early april 09. I applied for UI, phone interview this week.

I've considered consulting an attorney but if it's going to cost me money I don't know if I could afford it. As far as suing, the owner is financially well off but I'm truly not looking for a big payday. I would like to help the employees (friends) that are still there.

The owner at least pretends to be savy of the law, as if he knows he has all his bases covered and there's no way he can get into trouble. During one dispute he actually dared me to call the Labor Board (I hadn't even brought them up), he even offered to supply me with their phone number. Perhaps it's all a bluff.

A little more insight into the owner. He used to make employees go to his private residence to perform manual labor(landscaping, ect). This labor had absolutely nothing to do with the work they were hired to do. This practice only came to an end when one employee suffered a near fatal heart attack while performing such labor. The employee did not sue, lack of will, lack of leagal knowledge. That employee still works for the company and is the witness I mentioned in my original post. It really is a bad situation all the way around. Like I said, tip of the iceberg.

 

[las365]

A little more insight into the owner. He used to make employees go to his private residence to perform manual labor(landscaping, ect). This labor had absolutely nothing to do with the work they were hired to do.

That may be a**holey, but it isn't illegal.

I don't see what civil legal claim the employee who had the heart attack would have had against him. People who are going to have a heart attack usually have them whether they undergo any particular extra physical exertion or not.

 

[Jwd]

Update-

I was denied my benefits. I told the truth, my former employer lied.

After I had my phone interview I found out from a former co-worker/friend that my former employer created an audio recording designed to portray me as a rotten employee. This recording was edited from secret recordings made over several years during regular private office meetings between myself and the owner. I can't help but wonder if this tape played a part in my denial of benefits.

Can an audio recording be submitted as evidence in a UI benefits proceeding/ appeals proccess? Is there any obligation to prove the authenticity of such a recording? How can I defend myself against such dishonesty?

The information I received about the creation of the recording is reliable. It was passed on by someone who was reluctantly recruited to help create it. I have no reason to doubt that it exists.

 

[ecmst12]

What was the reason for the denial? And what was the reason your employer gave for firing you?

 

[Jwd]

My "Notice Of Determination/Ruling" says-

"You are not eligible to receive benefits under California unemployment insurance code section 1256"

"You were discharged from your last job with (employers name) because you refused to follow reasonable directions."

Thats all it says as far as reasons.

According to the phone interviewer, my former employer said-

"Employee refused to clean his work area everyday as instructed."
What he didn't say is that HE SPECIFICALLY INSTRUCTED ME not to clean on days when time was limited as my normal work was the priority because it's what generated income for the company.

"Employee refused to go to lunch at his assigned time"
What he didn't say is that HE SPECIFICALLY TOLD ME not to go to lunch until I finished what I was working on at the time. In the nature of my work this was common and often resulted in my going to lunch 10 or 15 minutes late. I wasn't allowed to just drop what I was doing because it was lunch time. The idea that I WANTED to postpone my lunch is absolutely rediculous.

"Employee refused to arrive early to attend morning meetings"
No, employer INSTRUCTED ME to start work a half hour early but not clock in until my normal start time. Work a half hour off the clock without pay. That I refused to do.

My former employer provided some embelishment on each accusation which only increased the dishonesty. I've provided the main accusations and the responses I gave to the interviewer. At the end of the interview the interviewer said she was going to call my former employer for more information and that she would either call me back or I would be notified by mail. She never called me back.