California Supreme Court Puts Federal Bonus OT Formula In Doubt

SS
Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Contributor

With more than 900 lawyers across 18 offices, Seyfarth Shaw LLP provides advisory, litigation, and transactional legal services to clients worldwide. Our high-caliber legal representation and advanced delivery capabilities allow us to take on our clients’ unique challenges and opportunities-no matter the scale or complexity. Whether navigating complex litigation, negotiating transformational deals, or advising on cross-border projects, our attorneys achieve exceptional legal outcomes. Our drive for excellence leads us to seek out better ways to work with our clients and each other. We have been first-to-market on many legal service delivery innovations-and we continue to break new ground with our clients every day. This long history of excellence and innovation has created a culture with a sense of purpose and belonging for all. In turn, our culture drives our commitment to the growth of our clients, the diversity of our people, and the resilience of our workforce.
Seyfarth Synopsis: The Court of Appeal decision that held that employers may use the federal formula for calculating overtime on a flat sum bonus is no longer citable precedent as the California Supreme Court has granted review of the decision.
United States Employment and HR

Seyfarth Synopsis: The Court of Appeal decision that held that employers may use the federal formula for calculating overtime on a flat sum bonus is no longer citable precedent as the California Supreme Court has granted review of the decision.

On January 22, 2016, we reported on Alvarado v. Dart Container Corp. of California, (click here to read), in which the California Court of Appeal held that an employer can use the federal formula for calculating overtime on a flat sum bonus, even though the California Division of Labor Standards Enforcement Manual states otherwise. On May 11, 2016, the California Supreme Court granted review in the case. Since the California Supreme Court has granted review, Alvarado is no longer citable as precedent. We will report on the result of this case once the California Supreme Court has issued its decision.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More