This published decision is an excellent review of the elements for class action status in Labor Code violation actions. The case involved a class of limo drivers working for one large Los Angeles company who were not compensated during "gap times."
Gap times are periods when the drivers are "on call" and not permitted to use their company-assigned limos for personal use in case a driver is called to pick up a client.
Most drivers were not paid during these gap times - although some were - and there are understandable differences in how much gap time each driver accumulates.
All the drivers working for the company were initially certified for a class action against the employer for not paying them during these periods.
After a hearing on the certification issue, the trial court DE-certified the class on grounds that:
1. The Court could not ascertain whether the underlying claim had merit;
2. The class included some who would not be eligible for damages (because they were paid during some gap times);
3. There was no community of interests (because of the inherent differences among employees in the amount of gap time accumulated and how that time was spent).
4. Filing as a class was not the "superior" method of resolving the issues, as required by the class action statutes.
This decision took each of these reasons for de-certifying the class and showed why each was NOT grounds for de-certification. For example,
Regarding the merits of the underlying claim, the appellate court said the test wasn't to pre-decide the merits but just whether the THEORY OF RECOVERY had merits (which this one did).
Regarding the fact that not all in the class would be eligible, the Court basically said "So what?" These individuals could simply be excluded from the issue of damages later on (and that a class action is not inappropriate simply because each member of the class may at some point be required to make an individual showing as to his or her eligibility for recovery).
The Court said that if there was a reasonable showing that the drivers should be compensated for gap time, a class action lawsuit was recognized as generally a typical, and superior, way of resolving many such smaller claims with the same central issue.
It reversed the trial court's decertification order.
The case is Ghazaryan v. Diva Limousine.
To read the full opinion,
PLEASE CLICK HERE.
- Help for the Injured Worker
