Is there a Labor Law Violation here?

[BigBenny]

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

Hello! Let me try and be brief here. I was sent out by an agency to what was suppose to be a 'long-term' work-assignment and began work. A week later, I reported to work but was turned away despite the fact such work was scheduled for 8 hours. I let the agency know that I was expecting 'Reporting Time Pay' of 4 hours pursuant to Ca. Labor Law and was offered only 2 hours instead.

I kept going back and forth with the agency on what the amount of reporting time should be and they continued to insist on paying me 2 hours instead of the lawfully compliant 4 hours' pay. Seven days later, My co-workers from the agency and I were told that the assignment had ended and a week after that, I was coerced to sign a document stating I voluntarily resigned from the assignment that my co-workers and I had been terminated from. At first, I refused to sign the document but then they told me I wouldn't be getting my paycheck unless I signed it, so I signed it because I needed my paycheck to pay the rent with.

Can anyone on this site agree with me that something is unlawful here concerning what I've stated above? I would appreciate it if someone could help me. I'm not interested in talking to any attorneys because I've had issues with them in the past. I just need to know if it may be worth it for me to pursue as a pro se litigant. Thanks!

 

[cbg]

The appropriate response would be for you to file a wage complaint with the DLSE. That will cost you nothing. It's not as sexy as litigating it in court, but it is nonetheless a more appropriate, and less expensive, option.

 

[BigBenny]

The appropriate response would be for you to file a wage complaint with the DLSE. That will cost you nothing. It's not as sexy as litigating it in court, but it is nonetheless a more appropriate, and less expensive, option.

Will the DLSE address my issues with the agency's retaliation and their wrongful conduct in regard to forcing me to resign from my work-assignment in their attempt to make it look like I willfully resigned?

 

[Zigner]

Will the DLSE address my issues with the agency's retaliation and their wrongful conduct in regard to forcing me to resign from my work-assignment in their attempt to make it look like I willfully resigned?

Retaliation?
Wrongful conduct?

Those are conclusions that really aren't supported by the facts, as you have presented them.

 

[BigBenny]

Retaliation?
Wrongful conduct?

Those are conclusions that really aren't supported by the facts, as you have presented them.

I'm sorry! I was assigned to what was suppose to be a long-term work-assignment, but yet, 7 days after I started exercising my right to receive wages owed to me, I was pulled off the work-assignment. Then, on the following paycheck, I STILL didn't receive my 4 hours' 'Reporting Time Pay' that was due me. Then, I was presented with a document to sign that had language stating I was "Voluntarily" resigning from the work-assignment that it looks like I was pulled off of.

Doesn't it look like I was retaliated against for trying to get my reporting time pay? Forcing me to resign from my work-assignment means I cannot go back to future assignments and I'm losing wages as a result. I'm hopeful that the DLSE will address these issues in addition to me not receiving my reporting time pay in a timely manner.

 

[cbg]

Will the DLSE address my issues with the agency's retaliation and their wrongful conduct in regard to forcing me to resign from my work-assignment in their attempt to make it look like I willfully resigned?

Yes. IF there is a valid reason to believe that there is illegal retaliation, the DLSE will address it.

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

I always wonder when I hear someone say or write this. How exactly were you forced to sign the voluntary resignation? Were firearms involved, a big guy named Vinny?

 

[BigBenny]

I always wonder when I hear someone say or write this. How exactly were you forced to sign the voluntary resignation? Were firearms involved, a big guy named Vinny?

Unfortunately, many of us have to live paycheck to paycheck. It is very hard to make ends meet when you've barely got enough to put food on the table and pay the rent, so when the agency threatened to with-hold my paycheck if I didn't sign the 'voluntary resignation document', it was a no-brainer for me to sign the document. I'm really surprised that you don't understand that.

 

[Zigner]

Unfortunately, many of us have to live paycheck to paycheck. It is very hard to make ends meet when you've barely got enough to put food on the table and pay the rent, so when the agency threatened to with-hold my paycheck if I didn't sign the 'voluntary resignation document', it was a no-brainer for me to sign the document. I'm really surprised that you don't understand that.

You still chose to sign it. You weren't forced to do so. That's the point that was being made.

 

[BigBenny]

You still chose to sign it. You weren't forced to do so. That's the point that was being made.

Wrong! I was coerced to sign the document under the threat of not receiving my paycheck. See Ca. Civil Code section 1567.

Tell me, how many people would willingly sign such a document saying they voluntarily resigned from a work-assignment when they didn't? Nobody would sign such a document unless they were paid a reasonable severance package to do so OR they refused to give them something like a paycheck that was already owed them.

I think I like CBG's responses better, since she adds a bit more common sense into the mix than what has been posted by others in response to my query.

 

[Zigner]

Wrong! I was coerced to sign the document under the threat of not receiving my paycheck. See Ca. Civil Code section 1567.

What you don't seem to comprehend is that the situation you've described doesn't actually rise to the level required to meet the elements listed in 1567.

But, hey, you obviously know better than anyone else, right?

 

[The Occultist]

Withholding your paycheck would have been illegal. Sure they made the threat, but they could not have legally followed through on it if you chose not to sign the document.

 

[BigBenny]

What you don't seem to comprehend is that the situation you've described doesn't actually rise to the level required to meet the elements listed in 1567.

But, hey, you obviously know better than anyone else, right?

And that's why I'm here. I want to find out from the experts if they believe I have some merit in taking this on. I believe there is merit for a couple claims based on what the agency did, but I'm trying to see what you think.

For instance, I'm a little baffled as to how being coerced to sign a false document under the threat of not receiving my paycheck, doesn't violate 1567. Please explain how it doesn't rise to the level which would make it a violation. I'm here to get the perspective of labor experts like you who can help me either continue on a course to making claims or not, based on your reasons one way or the other.

I'm also trying to be respectful here, so please don't try and turn this around and make statements like I know better than anyone else, simply because I know enough to disagree with certain things already posted about my issues with an employment agency. Thanks.

 

[cbg]

If by "taking this on" you mean filing a lawsuit, then NO. I do not think there would be any merit in your taking this on, particularly not pro se. Their attorneys will know what they're doing. You do not, and they will BURY you.

Why are you so resistant to the idea of filing a wage claim?

 

[BigBenny]

If by "taking this on" you mean filing a lawsuit, then NO. I do not think there would be any merit in your taking this on, particularly not pro se. Their attorneys will know what they're doing. You do not, and they will BURY you.

Why are you so resistant to the idea of filing a wage claim?

Thank you for responding! I'm not particularly resistant to the idea of filing a wage claim, except that I fear the DLSE might not address every issue regarding my perceived claims. For instance, I see that I was retaliated against for asserting my protected right to receive wages due (Reporting Time Pay). This retaliation is in violation of and described in Ca. Labor Code section 98.6, which forbids an employer to retaliate against me because I asked for my reporting time pay and they continued to avoid paying it by offering less than what is compliant by Ca. law.

I also lost my work-assignment because they coerced me to sign a false document to make it look like I resigned from the work-assignment, so based on 98.6, I could receive front and back pay and even reinstatement if a court agrees that adverse actions were committed against me, as it looks.

Also, I did finally get my 4 hours' reporting time pay, a pay-period later than I was suppose to, so that violates 1197.1(a) of the Labor Code as well.

So I'm just trying to get feedback from the experts of this forum which can help me decide whether I should file a claim with the DLSE or take it upon myself to file with the superior court. Again, thanks for responding CBG, I appreciate your input.