Font size: bigger | smaller

Should I Be Paid for Standby Time? (California Law)

This guide is for information only and is not legal advice. Legal advice must be tailored to specific facts. This guide is based on general legal principles and does not address all possible claims, exceptions or conditions related to the subject matter discussed.

by Marilynn Mika Spencer

Whether an employer must pay an employee for standby time depends on whether the time is “controlled standby" or “uncontrolled standby." In simple terms, this means that if the employee cannot use his or her time for personal reasons, the time is controlled and considered time worked. However, as with most areas of the law, applying the rule to each situation requires analysis.

The California Division of Labor Standards Enforcement (DLSE) publishes an Enforcement Manual. The Manual explains controlled standby as follows: “If the employee’s time is so restricted that [he or she] cannot pursue personal activities and come and go as he [or she] pleases, the employer is considered to have direction and control of the employee." If the employer has direction and control, the time is compensable work time.

The DLSE uses the two-part test in the California Supreme Court case of Madera Police Officers Assn. v. City of Madera, 36 Cal.3d 403(1984) to decide whether standby time is compensable. Part One measures whether the restrictions on the employee are primarily directed toward fulfilling the employer’s requirements and policies. Part Two asks whether the employee is substantially restricted to the point where he or she cannot attend to private pursuits. It is this second part that requires the most analysis. The courts will review the overall effect of the employer’s restrictions on the employee, not whether the employee is restricted at one particular slice of time.

California law looks at the same factors as in the federal case of Berry v. County of Sonoma, 30 F.3d 1174 (9th Cir.1994), including:

  • whether there are excessive geographical restrictions on employees’ movements;
  • whether the frequency of calls [to work or return to work] is unduly restrictive;– whether a required response time is unduly restrictive;
  • whether the on-call employee can easily trade his or her on-call responsibilities with another employee; and
  • whether the extent of personal activities engaged in during on-call time.

DLSE Opinion Letter 1998.12.28.

Another way of describing this is to consider if the employee was “engaged to wait" or “waited to be engaged." Did the employer hire the employee for the purpose (or partial purpose) of waiting to work? Or is the employee waiting for the opportunity to work? This is highly dependent on the specific facts. Owens v. Local No. 169, Ass'n of W. Pulp and Paper Workers, 971 F.2d 347, 354 (9th Cir.1992)

Contact Us

Spencer Johnson McCammon LLP
2727 Camino del Rio South
Suite 140
San Diego, CA 92108
Phone: (619) 233-1313

Spencer Johnson McCammon Weekly

Spencer Johnson McCammon Weekly

Topic of the Week

Domestic Violence and the Workplace

Read more...

Blog of the Week

The Nightmare Facing the Poor and Working Class If There’s Not Another Stimulus

With time running out and Republicans balking at more Covid relief, U.S. workers are facing a future of financial misery.

Thought for the Week

"Domestic violence and sexual assault walk in the doors of each and every workplace every day here in the United States. Domestic violence robs our employees of their dignity and their health, and these issues hide in darkness until we bring them into the light."

–Kim Wells | Executive director of the Corporate Alliance to End Partner Violence

List of the Week

from Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM)

Domestic Violence & The Workplace

  • One in every four women and one in 10 men will experience domestic violence in their lifetime
  • The Department of Labor reports that victims of domestic violence lose nearly 8 million days of paid work per year in the U.S., resulting in a $1.8 billion loss in productivity for employers.
  • An estimated 1.3 million women are victims of physical assault by an intimate partner each year and that 85% of domestic violence victims are women.
  • 21% of full-time employed adults said they were victims of domestic violence and 74% of that group said they’ve been harassed at work.
  • 65% of companies don’t have a formal workplace domestic violence prevention policy, according to research conducted by the.

Top Five News Headlines

  1. We need to talk about the science behind implicit bias training
  2. Trump Issues Order Giving Him More Leeway to Hire and Fire Federal Workers
  3. Amazon workers threaten to shut down warehouses if employees don’t get a day off to vote.
  4. What employees should know about expressing their political beliefs outside the workplace
  5. The Do’s and Don’ts of Workplace Etiquette