The Road to Justice Under California Labor Law

Fresno, CA When a private construction project intersects with a public entity such as a highway or public thoroughfare, there are rules and statutes under the auspices of California labor law that govern workers and how much they are paid. In other words, if a public road is revised with private, rather than public funding, such a funding model cannot be used to circumvent rules of labor, as one general contractor and a number of subcontractors recently discovered.

To that end, Valley Vanguard Properties, Inc. (Valley Vanguard) and six subcontractors have been hit with wage and penalty assessments for violating California labor code over a road widening in concert with the installation of a Wal-Mart store in Kerman, California.

According to PR Newswire (3/26/13), Valley Vanguard was given the nod to build a new Wal-Mart facility on behalf of East Kerman Development, the developer of record on the project. In concert with the facility build - and in view of an expectation for increased traffic flow stemming from the facility - the City of Kerman made it a condition when approving the new Wal-Mart that Highway 180 would require an expansion to four lanes, in order to handle the traffic flow.

To that end, even though the highway is a public thoroughfare, the widening was undertaken through private funding, with Valley Vanguard handling the road widening in concert with the aforementioned subcontractors.

However, according to the release, Valley Vanguard and its subcontractors got into some hot water under California labor law.

“Developers and contractors in California should be aware that public works laws may be triggered when a project requires work on state roads or highways as a condition of the project’s construction approval,” said Christine Baker, director of the Department of Industrial Relations (DIR).

Those words were echoed by the Office of the California Labor Commissioner. “If a project with private funding requires a Caltrans encroachment permit,” stated Labor Commissioner Julie A. Su, “the private funding cannot be used to avoid public works laws and the requirement to pay workers prevailing wages.”

Following a complaint and subsequent investigation, Valley Vanguard and six subcontractors were ordered to pay wage and penalty assessments exceeding $300,000.

The penalties break down as follows: $263,670 in wages, $4,289 in training fund contributions and $45,745 in penalties as a result of the California labor employment law violations.

According to the release, the six subcontractors were identified as Barracuda Construction, Inc., Prestige Electric Corporation and Safety Network, Inc., all of Fresno; Clovis-based contractor Davis & Roberts Construction, Inc.; Kerman Telephone Co., based in Kerman; and R & L Gibbs Construction, based in Squaw Valley.

Streets and Highways Code Section 670.1 mandates the payment of prevailing wages for road and highway work requiring a Caltrans encroachment permit as a condition for residential and commercial construction. “Valley Vanguard, as the prime contractor for the highway expansion project,” said Commissioner Su, “is responsible for ensuring that all workers performing construction work on a public works project are paid the correct prevailing wage rates.”

Often, as the result of a complaint or violation report, the Labor Commissioner’s office will undertake a California labor lawsuit. Such an undertaking, while upholding California state labor laws, is important for two reasons...

To provide justice for workers who have been shortchanged out of their rightful provisions under California employee labor law, and to protect law-abiding corporations who respect and adhere to California prevailing wage law.

Allegedly Forcing Workers to Toil Off the Clock Lands Car Wash in Hot Water

Fresno, CA The iconic lyrics of Rose Royce’s “Car Wash” notwithstanding, a car wash can be a challenging place to work at the best of times: it’s always damp, the pay is low and the work often backbreaking and thankless. “You might not ever get rich, but let me tell ya it’s better than diggin’ a ditch…” All hands may not agree with that last statement. However, California labor law sets out various tenets and regulations for car wash workers in an attempt to make the work at least fair if not palatable.

All too often, however, employers fall down on that basic basket of rights, as a recent California labor lawsuit aptly demonstrates. According to the Fresno Bee (3/12/13), White Glove Car Wash is facing a lawsuit filed by the Office of the Labor Commissioner of California for failure to pay adequate wages to 33 workers employed at the Blackstone Avenue facility in Fresno.

The allegation is that White Glove failed to pay its workers minimum wage and overtime. The lawsuit was filed in Fresno County Superior Court and is seeking in excess of $279,000 in unpaid wages, penalties and damages.

An investigation into allegations of misconduct and affronts to the California labor code was undertaken by the Labor Commissioner’s office and the Department of Industrial Relations (DIR). The investigation found that workers - having started work - were often delayed in “clocking in” at the behest of a supervisor. Given that the hourly paid employees were not allowed to clock in, independently, until instructed by a supervisor, many employees worked several hours in a week off the clock, and for which they were allegedly not paid.

In some cases, according to the California and labor law report, employees would put in eight full hours of work and be paid only four.

“Making workers stand by for work without paying them, and covering up the violation by keeping false time cards, is a breach of the basic promise of a just day’s pay for a hard day’s work,” said Julie A. Su, California labor commissioner, in comments defending California labor employment law.

Those comments were echoed by Christine Baker, director of the Department of Industrial Relations. “Employers who deny workers the pay they’ve earned will be held accountable,” said Baker. “These illegal actions hurt not only the employees, but also honest businesses and taxpayers.”

It was reported that the Labor Commissioner’s office has been cracking down on the car wash industry of late, given the increasing and repeated violations of California employee labor law.

Various federal and state statutes govern the workplace in an effort to ensure workers are treated fairly. Su’s office has been noticeably aggressive in pursuing complaints of wrongdoing under California prevailing wage law and other statues, in an effort to protect not only affected workers, but also to support law-abiding employers who lose business to more cutthroat employers able to charge lower prices due to lower costs - costs borne on the backs of their workers.

Employees who suspect ill treatment and violations to California state labor laws are urged to seek a qualified attorney to pursue a claim.

Under California Labor Law, Employees Are Not Independent Contractors

Long Beach, CA Truck drivers improperly classified as independent contractors by their Gardena-based employer had their final day in court on the last day of February, when a California labor law trial, on appeal, found in favor of the plaintiffs.

According to a release by PR Newswire (3/1/13), drivers piloting trucks on behalf of Seacon Logix were made to sign agreements with their employer, labeling them as independent contractors. As such, according to California labor code, the drivers would not be eligible for overtime or other provisions that would be due an actual employee of a firm.

However, according to the report, when four Seacon Logix drivers filed wage claims with the Long Beach office of the California Labor Commissioner, it was determined upon further investigation that Seacon exercised sufficient control over its drivers that a designation of independent contractor proved invalid under California labor employment law.

The drivers reported to the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement (DLSE) that business expenses were not reimbursed by the company, together with deductions deemed unlawful under California state labor law. Those deductions, it was alleged, included weekly truck rental fees and liability insurance costs, according to the report.

The original hearings in the case took place in November 2011, and the decision went in factor of the plaintiffs. At the time, Seacon Logix was required to pay $105,089.15 for violations of unlawful withholding of wages, interest and waiting time penalties under California prevailing wage law.

Seacon Logix appealed to the Superior Court. On February 28, the California Superior Court upheld the original finding and encumbered Seacon Logix to pay its drivers $107,802.00, including interest. It was reported that drivers will see the full benefit of the award.

In a statement, the California Labor Commissioner said, “In this case, drivers had signed agreements labeling them independent contractors but the Court saw the truth behind the label.” Labor Commissioner Julie A. Su went on to say, “The Court found that the company exerted sufficient control over the drivers such that the drivers were employees of the company and thus, enjoy all basic labor law protections.

“This case highlights the critical need for labor law enforcement, particularly where misclassification cheats hardworking men and women like these port truck drivers out of the full pay to which they were entitled,” continued Labor Commissioner Su, in addressing the California employee labor law case. “This is wage theft and we will do everything in our power to stop it.”

Big or Small, Violation of California Labor Law Is Just Wrong

Sacramento, CA One case involves a million-dollar assessment against a contractor. Another case involves a lessor amount against a California employer. The latter assessment amounting to about $69,000 is a lot less than nearly $1 million. But the issue is the same: the violation of California labor law as it pertains to wages. According to the law, there are minimum requirements for wages, and employers are expected to hold up their part of the bargain.

In the larger case, Ace Cooling & Heating Corporation has been ordered to pay $824,570.63 in back wages, $114,300 in fines and $23,685.12 in training fund contributions to about 10 employees over violations of the California labor code.

At issue is work performed by the contractor in association with the Torrance-based El Camino Community College Bookstore Modernization project. According to an investigation by the California Department of Industrial Relations’ Division of Labor Standards Enforcement (DLSE), the contractor failed in its obligation to pay the necessary California prevailing wage.

California employee labor law dictates that employees with a certain skill set and qualifications are to be paid according to a certain level. As reported by a news release made available by the California Department of Industrial Relations, sheet metal workers deployed on the project were paid between $8.50 and $16.00 per hour.

They should have been paid a lot more under California state labor laws. An investigation determined that workers were underpaid between $39 and $46 per hour. In other words, according to labor laws, they should have been paid three to five times more than they were paid for the work they were doing.

“This is a classic example of wage theft,” stated California Labor Commissioner Julie A. Su, in a release, “and my office will take immediate action against a business who steals money from its workers.” The subcontractor was identified as Ace Cooling & Heating Corporation. It was reported that Mackone Development Inc. of Los Angeles was hired as the primary contractor for the renovation. Mackone contracted with Ace to undertake the heating, cooling and air work for the project. Under California labor code, primary contractors are responsible for the conduct of their subcontractors as it relates to the job at hand, and for this reason, Mackone was also served a civil wage and penalty assessment. The amount was not disclosed.

“Prime contractors are jointly and severally liable for their subcontractors who fail to follow California’s labor law,” continued Labor Commissioner Su. “It is our practice to investigate all parties responsible for labor law violations to put the proper incentive on decision-makers in construction projects to deal only with honest, law-abiding contractors.”

On a much smaller scale, the California Department of Labor investigated an employer based in Sunnyvale, after Bloom Energy Corp. employed a group of 14 workers brought in from Chihuahua, Mexico, to aid in the refurbishment of power generators at the company’s headquarters at Sunnyvale. According to a news release from the state Labor Department (2/4/13), it was determined that Mexican workers toiled alongside US workers, doing the same work but paid far less than their Sunnyvale-based counterparts. The investigation found that the 14 Mexicans were paid in Mexican pesos, which translated to an hourly wage of about US $2.66.

Bloom Energy was identified in the news release as a manufacturer of clean energy power generating systems with contracts amongst some of the major business players in the US, including Coca-Cola, FedEx Corp., Kaiser Permanente, Wal-Mart Stores Inc., eBay Inc. and Bank of America Corp.

Bloom Energy was found to be in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and was ordered to pay $31,922 in back wages to the 14 Mexican workers, together with an equal amount in liquidated damages. The firm was also assessed a civil penalty of $6,160 for its violation of California prevailing wage law.

Car Wash Employers Got to Come Clean

Santa Monica, CA An 11-count criminal complaint was filed against the owners and managers of Wilshire West Car Wash for cheating employees out of money and labor, and other California labor law violations over the past four years.

The criminal complaint, which was filed January 23, 2013, has charged the owner, general manager and two supervisors with conspiracy to cheat employees out of their wages. The California Department of Industrial Relations’ Division of Labor Standards Enforcement discovered a litany of methods the car wash used over the past four years to cheat workers out of their wages. The Santa Monica Patch said the complaint accuses the four defendants of violating California labor laws by not giving workers rest and meal breaks, and “coercing employees into signing declarations which falsely stated that they had received paid breaks,” according to city prosecutors. It also accuses the defendants of falsifying and altering employees’ time cards to make it appear as though they worked fewer hours than they actually did.

The Santa Monica City Attorney’s Office has charged them with grand theft of money and labor by false pretenses; conspiracy; failure to pay minimum wage; failure to give meal breaks and rest breaks; and taking back wages which had been paid.

How did they think they could get away with cheating their employees? How could they not know that two other Santa Monica car washes had previously been accused of violating California’s labor laws? Santa Monica Car Wash and Detailing last May was slapped with a civil complaint filed by the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund on behalf of carwasheros. And the state Attorney General announced earlier this year settlement of a lawsuit it had filed against eight other California car washes - including Bonus Car Wash in Santa Monica - over similar California labor law violations.

In March 2012, the California Labor Commissioner filed two lawsuits against three car washes for unpaid wages, penalties and damages, totaling more than $2 million. Rosencrans King Car Wash was accused of not paying its workers for all the hours they worked, and the lawsuit seeks almost $1.7 million in minimum wage, overtime, penalties and attorney fees. Vermont Auto Spa also violated similar California state labor laws.

And back in October 2010, a former Los Angeles carwashero filed a lawsuit against Handy J Carwash, charging that his ex-employers forced him for years to show up for work early in the morning but he wasn’t allowed to clock in until hours later. In June 2011, Tomas Rodriguez, 41, of Hidalgo, Mexico, was awarded $80,000: Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Mark Mooney ruled that the three car wash owners and one manager were liable for $50,000 in back wages for failing to provide proper employment records, and an additional $30,000 in damages.

“Wage theft hurts workers, honest employers, and the honest tax payer,” Department of Industrial Relations Director Christine Baker said in a press release. “California’s Division of Labor Standards Enforcement plays a critical role in enforcing labor laws and preventing wage theft. Employers who deny the workers their pay will be held accountable.”

According to the Santa Monica Mirror ( Jan 23, 2013), the specific acts alleged against the owners and managers of Wilshire West Car Wash as part of the conspiracy include:

1. Altering employee time records - and creating false time records - to make it appear that workers had worked less hours than they actually had;
2. Creating false time records to give the appearance that employees took meal breaks when in fact the employees were still on duty at the time;
3. Coercing employees into signing declarations which falsely stated that they had received paid breaks;
4. Forcing employees to pay a regular fee for cable television even though they were not allowed to watch television on the job;
5. Forcing employees to pay a regular fee for towel laundering;
6. Threatening, harassing and punishing employees who questioned the defendants’ unlawful behavior;
7. Failing to give employees a paid rest period for every four hours worked, as required by law;
8. Failing to give employees a meal break for shifts of at least five hours, as required by law.

The criminal charges, all of which are misdemeanors, include:

- grand theft of money and labor by false pretenses;
- conspiracy;
- failure to pay minimum wage;
- failure to give meal breaks;
- failure to give paid breaks; and
- taking back wages that have already been paid.

The defendants will be arraigned in the Los Angeles County Superior Court, Airport courthouse, on February 26, 2013. Each of the 11 charged offenses is a misdemeanor that carries a maximum penalty of one year in county jail, and maximum fines of between $1,000 and $10,000 per offense.

New California Labor Law and a Justin Bieber Lawsuit

Los Angeles, CA A number of changes to California labor law for 2013 are designed to further enhance protections for workers, employees and laborers toiling in the state. To that end it’s useful for both employers and employees to be up to speed on these changes, in the event there should ever be a problem.

As for Bieber’s bodyguard, we’ll get back to that. It does prove, however, that even famous celebrities are often themselves, employers and thus are required to subscribe to the same rules and regulations as everyone else.

One update to the California labor code that came into effect the first of the month has to do with social media, and the rights employees have in that regard. An employer does not have the right to ask for user names or passwords to social media accounts or other similar accounts from either employees or job applicants, with an eye to perusing the bowels of a Facebook or twitter account--or even email--for the purposes of obtaining background information on the employee, or prospective employee.

While California and labor law provides for exceptions to that rule in the event a formal investigation into employee conduct is ever needed, user names and passwords are otherwise off limits. Any employer who requires them or even uses them to dig into an employee’s life without just cause could be faced with a California labor lawsuit.

Other updates to California labor employment law, as outlined in The San Diego Union-Tribune (1/10/13) include updated rights for ex-employees to access their personal work records--a right that has always been available to current employees. 2013 also marked the beginning of updated amendments to contracts for commissioned employees.

California state labor laws require employers to post these laws in the workplace so that employees will have access to current regulations.

As for Justin Bieber, he’s been having some trouble of late. The horrific story about the photographer who was recently run down and killed trying to snap photos of the young pop sensation notwithstanding, Bieber has been having some issues with a bodyguard, according to The Business Insider (1/11/13).

The report notes that Moshe Benabou, who was employed by Justin Bieber as a personal bodyguard starting in March 2011 before he was fired after seven months on the job, filed a California labor lawsuit against the singer, alleging the Canadian teen heartthrob was aggressive towards Benabou and punched him in the chest repeatedly while backstage during a concert in October of last year. The Business Insider cited The Hollywood Reporter as a source.

The plaintiff claims in his action that he worked between 14 and 18 hours per day, 7 days per week but was not paid overtime in accordance with California prevailing wage law. The Business Insider cited TMZ as suggesting sources from the Bieber camp had reported to TMZ that Benabou was, in the defendant’s view, disgruntled over being fired. It was suggested in the report that Benabou had uttered a number of untruths to Bieber.

The California employee labor lawsuit was filed January 10 in Superior Court of the State of California, for the County of Los Angeles, and cited nonpayment of California overtime, and assault and battery on the part of Justin Bieber. Those allegations are yet to be proven in a court of law. The case is Moshe Benabou v. Justin Bieber & BT Touring LLC of Delaware, # BC498862.

General Nutrition Corp Employees Filed California Labor Lawsuit

Sacramento, CA If you are one of about 8,000 current or former General Nutrition Corp. (GNC) assistant managers or sales associates, read on: You could receive overtime compensation pay under the California labor law and FLSA .“On January 7th a California federal judge granted class status to this case, which was brought by a former employee of GNC,” says employment attorney Leonard Emma.

Charles Brewer, a former California employee of GNC, filed a complaint in July 2011, which has since been amended twice. In January 2012 the suit claimed that employees who worked the closing shifts at GNC retail stores were not properly paid for certain tasks they completed after clocking out for the day, and often failed to receive California overtime pay. U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers ruled the certification partial because the scope of the opt-in class includes sales associates and assistant managers only and not managers and senior managers at GNC stores, which was asked by GNC employees in their initial request.

“There are two class actions within this lawsuit.” says Leonard Emma. “Plaintiff alleges overtime violations under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) on behalf of a nationwide class, which the Court certified. Plaintiff also alleges meal and rest period violations, off-the-clock violations and related causes of action on behalf of California employees. Plaintiff will move the Court to certify the California case next.”

The lawsuit (Case No.: 11-CV-03587 YGR) alleges that GNC doesn’t pay its retail store employees when they perform closing duties. “At a certain point during the night, GNC retail store employees log off the cash register and clock out. But they are still required to perform closing duties, including making offsite bank deposits, which leads to overtime violations.” In other words, taking the deposit to the bank after clocking out constitutes overtime.

Furthermore, GNC says it is up to its employees to report their hours accurately but there is no formal training provided regarding how employees can get paid for closing duties. According to GNC,

(1) employees are permitted to enter an estimated future time when they will be done working

(2) if they go over the estimated time, they can, with management approval, claim that time as overtime.

Emma says there is evidence that GNC discourages people from reporting hours worked beyond those hours they are scheduled for. “And as the court noted, GNC does not have any written policies or training and that, coupled with corporate culture to discourage overtime, results in people working off the clock nationwide. “

According to an opposition to class certification filed by GNC last October, the company says that it has maintained a time-card system that prompts employees working the closing shifts to estimate time they might spend completing tasks after they officially clock out. GNC further stated that it provides training to teach employees about making those estimations, and provides workers with an opportunity to make corrections to their time card.

Judge Rogers disagreed. The January 7th ruling said that the company had not provided evidence of written company policies that back up those contentions.

As per the court order: “GNC has no written policy setting forth the procedure for an employee to be paid for time spent performing post-closing duties; no written policy on estimating hours worked; and no written policy on adjusting hours to account for time spent performing post-closing duties if an employee exceeds the time estimate."

The court estimates that 8,000 class members in the US--GNC sales associates and assistant managers -- "may be entitled to overtime under the FLSA.

Another Million-Dollar Bust Under California Labor Law

Sacramento, CA Violations against California labor law by two contractors has resulted in combined wage and penalty assessments totaling in excess of $1 million. The foregoing is an example of not only the commitment by the Office of the California Labor Commissioner to root out unlawful behavior on the part of employers, but is also demonstrative of injustices that continue to be suffered by well-meaning employees, simply trying to do their jobs.

Beyond having a proactive labor commissioner dedicated to advocating on behalf of workers, in many instances a California labor lawsuit is the only recourse workers have to fight unfair treatment.

According to a release by US State News (12/17/12), FTR International Inc. was found to have failed to pay their workers the correct prevailing wages according to California and labor law guidelines. The Office of the California Labor Commissioner also accused the firm of failing to pay its employees daily overtime, and failure to pay premium rates for work performed during weekends, in addition to other violations.

FTR International, according to the statement, was hired by the Southern California Regional Rail Authority to undertake the Los Angeles Union Station 'Platform 7' project. The firm does business as a general contractor, and was ordered to pay $401,041 in back wages and $185,725 in fines with regard to its affront to California labor employment law.

A similar story unfolds with Wirtz Quality Installations Inc. (Wirtz), a stone and tile contractor that was cited by the Labor Commissioner for failure to pay proper wages to 55 workers toiling on behalf of the general contractor on a construction project for Palomar Pomerado Health Systems.

In the Wirtz case, the contractor was found to have charged workers a percentage of their wages in various fees for payments made into a fringe benefit plan for supplemental unemployment insurance. The charge translated into what was deemed a significant underpayment of prevailing wages according to legislative guidelines governing California prevailing wage. According to an investigation by the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement (DLSE), Wirtz was also found to have failed to pay their workers appropriate overtime wages.

The Labor Commissioner for the state of California, Julie A. Su, stated in a news release that wage theft in any form would not be tolerated under her watch.

"Construction workers work long hours and perform invaluable work building the infrastructure in our communities," Commissioner Su said in a statement. "My office is here to ensure that all public works contractors pay fringe benefit packages as required by law. Charging fees for these benefits is an unlawful end-run around prevailing wage laws."

Wirtz was ordered to pay $102,292.47 in back wages and $402,450 in fines to answer for violations against the California prevailing wage law.

As for FTR International, Su had this to say about the contractor's violation against California employee labor law: "The action against FTR should serve as a warning to other contractors who fail to abide by our laws," said Commissioner Su. "These enforcement actions are also a message to law-abiding contractors that we are here to help you by going after the scofflaws."

California Sub-contractor to Pay Over $1 Million for California Labor Law Violations

Stockton, CA A California plumbing and mechanical enterprise that served as a sub-contractor on a state public works project has been hit with a bill in excess of $1 million for violations to California labor law. The prime contractor has also been called to the carpet and is being held jointly responsible for the gaffe.

According to a statement released by the California Department of Industrial Relations (DIR 11/6/12), Nicodemus Plumbing and Mechanical has been mandated to pay $858,840.20 in back wages to 44 employees who worked for Nicodemus on a public works project at Stockton's San Joaquin Community College. The California labor lawsuit, brought by the Office of the Labor Commissioner, accused Nicodemus of falsifying certified payroll records.

The California labor code investigation by the DIR's Division of Labor Standards Enforcement (DLSE), also known as the Labor Commissioner's office, revealed that Nicodemus shaved the number of actual hours worked by the 44 identified workers, and thus failed to pay proper wages under California prevailing wage law.

Taisei Construction Corporation served as the primary contractor for the facility. Taisei, in turn, hired Nicodemus to undertake the plumbing work. According to state labor laws, even though the misdeeds were carried out by Nicodemus, Taisei as the primary contractor can be held jointly responsible for the California employee labor law violations committed by Nicodemus. Taisei, in fact, was served with a penalty by the Labor Commissioner, although the amount was not identified.

"Prime contractors can be held jointly responsible when their subcontractors fail to follow California's labor law," said California Labor Commissioner Julie A. Su. "We will investigate all parties responsible for labor law violations to put the proper incentive on decision-makers in construction projects to deal only with honest, law-abiding contractors."

Su likens the actions of Nicodemus to wage theft, and vows vigilance is necessary in a soft economy when employers skirting around state labor laws make it harder for legitimate companies, with equally deserving employees, to compete for work.

"Wage theft will not be tolerated," said Commissioner Su. "Falsifying records to underreport the number of hours worked is stealing money from workers and my office will take swift and aggressive action to end this illegal and abusive practice."

DIR Director Christine Baker echoed some of those sentiments in her own comments. "It is imperative in these times that enforcement action is taken to fight against California's underground economy and provide a fair and level playing field for businesses who comply with our laws."

Nicodemus was also assessed a total of $230,050 in fines for violation to the California prevailing wage and other violations to the California labor code.

The investigation determined that Nicodemus also failed to pay overtime, in accordance with California labor law.

Wage Theft not Tolerated, Says California Labor Commissioner

Stockton, CA A recent civil wage and penalty assessment issued by the California Labor Commissioner has resulted in a plumbing contractor having to pay over $1 million in California labor law violations.

The Cypress-based Nicodemus Plumbing & Mechanical contractor was ordered to pay 44 employees $858,840.20 in wages and $230,050 in fines for California labor code violations, including overtime violations. California Labor Commissioner Julie Su issued the assessment in an attempt to collect monies from the contractor owed to the workers.

According to the California Department of Industrial Relations' (DIR) Division of Labor Standards Enforcement (DLSE), also known as the California Labor Commissioner's office, the plumbing contractor failed to pay overtime and intentionally falsified certified payroll records by shaving the number of hours actually worked by its workers. Evidence by the California state labor law agencies revealed that Nicodemus Plumbing falsified records to underreport the number of hours worked??"violations of the California prevailing wage law.

Commissioner Su said that wage theft will not be tolerated, and that the contractor basically stole money from workers by falsifying records.

The workers performed plumbing work for San Joaquin Delta Community College??"the college hired Taisei Construction Corporation as the general contractor who then contracted Nicodemus Plumbing. The construction company was also served with a civil wage and penalty assessment.

The California Professional Association of Specialty Contractors (CALPASC) applauded the enforcement agencies on their assessment of willfully non-compliant contractors (some contractors are unintentionally non-compliant). Bruce Wick, CALPASC Director of Risk Management, said that some awarding authorities and general contractors continue to seek the lowest bid, regardless of whether those bids are in compliance. And in this case, at the expense of 44 workers.

“By investigating the source of the problem and publicly identifying those involved, as the Labor Commissioner's office has done, legitimate contractors will have a better chance at competing within this challenging economy,” Wick said.

A spokesperson for the Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors Association of California (PHCCA) issued a similar statement, praising the Labor Commissioner’s investigation and condemning the contractors. "Everyone loses when state contractor laws are ignored," said Tracy Threlfall, PHCCA Executive Vice President. “Legitimate contractors are driven out of business, employee and public safety go at risk, the quality of the product suffers and workers are short paid and may not be covered by workers' compensation insurance, while California loses millions in taxes. Shining a spotlight on the problem and the culprits may incentivize contractors to act within the law.”

According to The Sacramento Bee (11/6/12), the Commissioner said that "prime contractors can be held jointly responsible when their subcontractors fail to follow California's labor law.” Further, the California Labor Commissioner’s office stated that it will “investigate all parties responsible for labor law violations to put the proper incentive on decision-makers in construction projects to deal only with honest, law-abiding contractors."

The California Department of Industrial Relations' Division of Labor Standards Enforcement adjudicates wage claims, investigates discrimination and public works complaints and enforces state labor law.