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

Racial Harassment

Under federal law it is illegal to harass a person in any aspect of employment because of that person’s race or color. Harassment can include racial slurs, offensive or derogatory remarks about a person’s race or color, or the display of racia

Read more...

Blog of the Week

5 Steps For Creating A Safer Work Environment

Regardless of which side of the political fence you sit on, we can all agree that employees deserve and need a safe work environment. It’s the company’s moral obligation and legal responsibility to provide a safe environment for all of its employees. But what’s the best way to do that?

Thought for the Week

"It is essential that we shine a light on the immense contributions of black Americans in politics, business, art, science, and civic life. But if we just celebrate, we’re ignoring the harder truth that racism continues to hold black professionals back from leadership roles in corporate America. Workplace racism can end only when employees who are not black see, hear, and accept the truth about what their black colleagues have experienced and continue to experience. Black History Month is a great opportunity to begin this process."

–Trudy Bourgeois and Julia Taylor Kennedy

List of the Week

from Center for Talent Innovation

Enforcement and Litigation Report

  • 58% of black professionals have experienced racial prejudice at work—a higher percentage than any other racial or ethnic group surveyed.
  • Black adults hold only 8% of professional jobs and 3.2% of executive or senior-level management positions. 
  • While 65% of black professionals say that black employees must work harder to advance in their careers.

Top Five News Headlines

  1. Supreme Court sides with workers over retirement plan lawsuit deadlines
  2. Coronavirus: Disney World tells workers who traveled to Italy to stay home amid virus fears
  3. As U.S. Preps For Coronavirus, Health Workers Question Safety Measures
  4. Bloomberg’s company announces new mandatory sexual harassment training
  5. $2 million disability discrimination lawsuit settlement offers lessons for all operators