On Monday morning, the Supreme Court will file its opinion in Huerta v. HSA Electrical Contractors, Inc. (Briefs here; oral argument video here.)
In August 2022, the court agreed to answer these questions for the Ninth Circuit:
- Is time spent on an employer’s premises in a personal vehicle and waiting to scan an identification badge, have security guards peer into the vehicle, and then exit a Security Gate compensable as “hours worked” within the meaning of California Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Order No. 16?
- Is time spent on the employer’s premises in a personal vehicle, driving between the Security Gate and the employee parking lots, while subject to certain rules from the employer, compensable as “hours worked” or as “employer-mandated travel” within the meaning of California Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Order No. 16?
- Is time spent on the employer’s premises, when workers are prohibited from leaving but not required to engage in employer-mandated activities, compensable as “hours worked” within the meaning of California Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Order No. 16, or under California Labor Code Section 1194, when that time was designated as an unpaid “meal period” under a qualifying collective bargaining agreement?
More about the case here.
Huerta is half the January calendar. The opinion in the case that makes up the other half — Logan v. Country Oaks Partners, an arbitration matter — should file on Thursday.
Additional argued but undecided cases are the four from the February calendar (opinions expected by May 6) and the six from the March calendar (opinions expected by June 3).
The Huerta opinion can be viewed Monday starting at 10:00 a.m.
