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

Whistleblowing - Federal Employees

Many federal employees are protected from retaliation for reporting legal violations or government waste or fraud by the government agencies they work for. Federal employee whistleblowers are protected by the Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989 (WPA) and

Read more...

Blog of the Week

Kamala Harris goes big and bold with proposal for six months of paid family leave

Sen. Kamala Harris is offering up an expansive new paid family leave proposal. Harris had previously co-sponsored the FAMILY Act, which would provide three months of paid family leave—but now she’s calling for six months. Harris’ plan also calls for families with incomes under $75,000 to get full income replacement, with higher earners getting a lower percentage, while the FAMILY Act provides up to 66%.

Thought for the Week

"Any good whistleblower law will contain two primary provisions. First, it will provide for the protection of the whistleblower’s identity.....Second, the whistleblower law should not only prohibit retaliation against the whistleblower, but also provide for specific remedies if retaliation takes place."

–Tom Spiggle

List of the Week

from Workplace Fairness

Top searches in whistleblowing this week:

  • General information about whistleblowing
  • Federal Employee whistleblowers
  • Whistleblower retaliation 
  • Food Safety whistleblowers

Top Five News Headlines

  1. Sexual Harassment Training Now Required for 20% of U.S. Workers
  2. GM CEO Barra, top UAW officials meet, injecting 'new life' into strike talks
  3. Uber and Lyft Drivers Talk About Getting Ripped Off
  4. Advocates see discrimination against older workers, the fastest-growing group in the labor force
  5. Don't start 'wage war' for workers, top executive warns, raising antitrust fears