It is California Law

[Gregory Matthews]

For 17 months, Mr. Troester was employed by Starbucks as an hourly employee.  As part of his duties, at the end of his shift, he was required to perform unpaid duties such as locking a door.

He filed a lawsuit in which he requested back pay for the time that he had spent on those unpaid duties.  Starbucks fought the lawsuit in the litigation that lasted over a six year period of time and eventually reached the California Supreme Court.  In brief, Starbucks argued that it could not reasonably be expected to determine the time that would be required to lock a door, and any other such required services.

That court has just ruled on the case.  It  has ruled that Starbucks, in these modern times, could be expected to determine such times and therefore Starbucks was required to compensate Troester for the time that he had spent in performing those required tasks.

The California Supreme Court has ordered Starbucks to pay Mr. Troester the sum of $100 in back pay for those required services that he performed.

Starbucks has released an official statement to the effect that Starbucks is disappointed with the ruling of the Court.

NOTE:  I wonder how much Starbucks spent in legal fees?    I do not know.  but, on the assumption that this case was heard in court three times,  I could imagine that Starbucks  might have spent in the $210,000 to $250,000 range, and possibly more.  I am attempting to be conservative in my estimate.

If Starbucks has been ordered to pay Troester's legal expenses, which I suspect may be true, their total cost could add much more to the total cost.  Oh, well, just speculation.

Of course, now Starbucks will have to pay everyone else working in California who is doing those unpaid tasks.

 

 

[Gregory Matthews]

As I first learned of this litigation, I was puzzled as to why it was heard by a California Court instead of a Federal Court as I considered Federal law to be applicable in this case.

After having done some minimal research I have discovered that the litigation was first filed in Federal Court.  However, the 9th Circuit Court requested that the California Supreme Court directly take the case, which it did.  So, that is how it came to be heard by a California Court.

I am not going to even think as to how this may have affected the legal costs of Starbucks.