Employment: On Remand, Appellate Court Determines That Employer Did Not Bear Penalties Or Fee Exposure Under Labor Code Section 226 Because Failure To Pay For Meal/Rest Breaks And Failure To Report Same On Wage Statements Was Not Intentional

Employers May Be Happy With Many Aspects Of This Opinion.

            We have posted already on Naranjo v. Spectrum Security Services, Inc., 13 Cal.5^th 93, 102 (see our December 18, 2022 post on top 2022 decisions), which determined that meal/rest break premium charges and failure to report on wage statements could give rise to fee exposure under various Labor Code sections.  On remand, in Naranjo v. Spectrum Security Services, Inc., Case No. B256232 (2d Dist., Div. 4 Feb. 27, 2023) (published, opinion on remand from the California Supreme Court), employers may sigh a little more of a relief.  The appellate court determined that Labor Code section 226 violations, the gist of the remand issues on appeal, only allowed penalties and attorney’s fees if the employer violations were intentional in nature.  Under the record on appeal and after supplemental briefing by the parties, the 2/4 DCA determined employer had good faith defenses, such that the penalties and fees were not recoverable under an “intentional” standard.