California School Bus Drivers Claim Overtime Pay Requests Were Discouraged

A group of California school bus drivers pushed for class certification last Wednesday, claiming that their employer, First Student Inc, commonly discouraged overtime pay requests. Statements from 50 former drivers indicated a common policy of not paying for overtime, according to plaintiffs’ attorneys. The drivers allege that the company made it so difficult to submit and be awarded overtime pay that many were unable to do so.

The case alleges that First Student violated the state’s Labor Code.

According to the former drivers’ statements, workers were reprimanded and even reported for requesting overtime pay guaranteed to them by the Fair Labor Standards Act. The FLSA, a federal law that governs various aspects of employment law, sets parameters for compensation and overtime pay.

Plaintiffs’ attorneys argued before Los Angeles Superior Court Judge William F. Highberger that the drivers had common issue, and that certification of all First Student Inc drivers in a common class was appropriate.

First Student, however, disagreed, saying that there was in fact a lack of commonality and that the company does not allow off-the-clock work – therefore requiring specific, individual investigations into the reasons employees did not follow procedures to request overtime. An attorney for the company noted that daily bus reports with individual drivers would need to be consulted, along with individual extra time reports.

A previous California Supreme Court ruling, Brinker v. Superior Court, also sets precedent for employers with policies prohibiting off-the-clock work to deny off-the-clock claims, they added.

The case alleges that First Student violated the state’s Labor Code as well as unfair competition laws, and breached contracts when it did not pay plaintiffs for all times spent under the company’s control, whether requested or not. Examples of this include bus safety checks, fueling busses, and attending safety meetings, according to named plaintiff James Tyrer.

A ruling can be expected around mid-October, announced the judge, while warning that similarities with the Binker case did seem to be worth consideration. First Student has stated that drivers’ concern for children’s safety meant they were willing to perform tasks such as safety checks without pay.

The case continues as Tyrer v. First Student Inc., case number BC459305, in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles.