$90M Award Upheld in ABM Wage and Hour Class Action

The California Supreme Court has sided with the plaintiffs in an ABM wage and hour class action lawsuit, preserving a $90 million award.

Plaintiffs in the ABM wage and hour class action lawsuit sought review of an appeals court decision vacating the award. The case turns on whether California law requires employers to relieve employees of all work-related duties while on break.

This ABM wage and hour class action lawsuit began in 2005. Plaintiff Jennifer Augustus claimed defendant ABM Security Services was requiring its security guards to continue to be responsive to work demands even during their rest and meal breaks.

Guards were allegedly expected to remain vigilant, to keep their pagers or radio phones on, and to respond to any calls should a need arise, Augustus claimed.

Augustus argued that by imposing these work-related requirements during break time, ABM deprived its security guards of the rest and meal breaks they are entitled to under California law. ABM countered that it was not requiring guards to do work during break time but merely required them to remain on call.

The trial court concluded that for a break to truly be a break, the employer must relieve the employee of all work duties. Augustus won at trial, securing an award of over $90 million in statutory damages, interest, penalties, court costs and attorneys’ fees.

But on appeal, the 2nd District Court of Appeal reversed the award. The appeals court held that while an employer may not require an employee to work during break time, keeping an employee “on call” is not the same as requiring them to do work.

Therefore, in requiring its security guards to remain engaged, ABM did not deprive them of their legally mandated break time, the appeals court concluded.

Supreme Court Restores Award in ABM Wage and Hour Class Action

The Supreme Court granted review of the issue in May 2015. In December 2016, the court issued a decision in a 5-2 majority siding with Augustus and her plaintiff Class.

The court determined that under California law, a break is not truly a break if the employee is required to respond to inquiries during that time. Essentially, the court held that if an employee is on call during a break, the break did not occur.

The court stopped short of spelling out exactly what does and does not constitute a break in every possible circumstance, however.

The decision helps to clarify a previous Supreme Court opinion from 2012. That case dealt with a similar issue but did not fully clarify whether meal breaks and rest breaks should be treated the same. Meal breaks in California are taken off the clock, while rest breaks are not.

In addition to clarifying state law regarding meal and rest breaks, the decision will directly benefit a plaintiff Class of an estimated 15,000 current and former ABM security guards.

This ABM Wage and Hour Class Action Lawsuit is Augustus v. ABM Security Services, Case No. S224953, in the Supreme Court of the State of California.

Join a Free California Wage & Hour Class Action Lawsuit Investigation

If you were forced to work off the clock or without overtime pay within the past 3 years in California, you have rights – and you don’t have to take on the company alone.

Get a Free Case Evaluation Now