×
Search

866-540-5505

Se Habla Espanol
Menu
Search

Our Blog

Home/Blog/FLSA: Ninth Circuit Holds L.A. Homecare Workers are Eligible for Overtime Compensation  

FLSA: Ninth Circuit Holds L.A. Homecare Workers are Eligible for Overtime Compensation  

On November 4, 2022, a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that for the purposes of the Fair Labor Stands Act (“FLSA”), Los Angeles County (the “County”) qualifies as a joint employer of In-Home Supportive Services (“IHSS”) providers and is therefore liable for failing to pay overtime compensation, partially reversing the Central District of California’s summary judgment order in favor of the Los Angeles County Department of Social Services.

Los Angeles County IHSS provider Trina Ray filed a putative collective action against the County to seek relief for unpaid overtime for the period between January 1, 2015 and February 1, 2016. The district court granted summary judgement to the County, determining that the County did not employ IHSS providers for the purposes of FLSA. The Ninth Circuit panel unanimously reversed the district court’s ruling, finding that the County is a joint employer of IHSS providers under FLSA.

Homecare workers are workers who serve as personal attendants to qualifying people, including individuals who are over the age 65, disabled, or blind. These workers provide a variety of services such as bathing, grocery shopping, and laundry.  In Los Angeles, homecare workers are directly hired and supervised by the individuals receiving services, but the program is partially administered by the County. Historically, homecare workers were excluded from the FLSA’s minimum wage and overtime compensation requirements under an exemption for “companion” workers intended to apply to casual babysitters. In 2013, the Department of Labor issued a new rule to narrow the exception and provide overtime and minimum wage protections to home care workers employed by third parties under the FLSA. The rule was scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2015, but a district court vacated the rule before it was implemented. The D.C. Circuit Court then reversed the district court’s decision, and the state started to pay overtime wages to IHSS providers pursuant to the ruling on February 1, 2016.

To determine joint employer status, the Ninth Circuit applied the “economic reality” test established in Bonnette v. Cal. Health & Welfare Agency, 704 F.2d 1465 (9th Cir. 1983), a case that considered whether the State of California and its counties are joint employers of IHSS providers. The test employs four factors, including “whether the alleged employer (1) had the power to hire and fire the employees, (2) supervised and controlled employee work schedules or conditions of employment, (3) determined the rate and method of payment, and (4) maintained employment records.”  

While the Ninth Circuit acknowledged there have been significant changes in the way homecare workers are paid since Bonnette was decided, it determined that Los Angeles County meets enough criteria of the test to merit designation as a joint employer. Specifically, the court found the County exercised economic control over IHSS workers by contributing a substantial amount of funding to the IHSS program. Additionally, the County has the authority to negotiate and set wages for providers and choose the method of payment for workers. The Court further found that the County exercises “considerable control over the nature and structure of the employment relationship,” noting that the County maintains employment records and employee IDs.  Finally, the County serves as the public face of the program by offering orientation sessions and training materials.

Updates will be posted to this blog as the matter progresses. The case caption for this action is Trina Ray et al. v. Los Angeles County Department of Public Social Services et al., No. 20-56245, filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and Trina Ray v. California Department of Social Services et al., No. 2:17-cv-04239-PA-SK, filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California.  

The legal team at Miller Shah LLP has significant experience representing employment matters. If you have any questions regarding this subject or this post, please contact Chiharu Sekino (cgsekino@millershah.com) or Johanna Richter (jcrichter@millershah.com). The firm can also be reached toll-free at (866) 540-5505.

Share Post:
facebooktwitterLinkedin

Categories

Archives

Contact
Miller Shah LLP

While this website provides general information, it does not constitute legal advice. The best way to get guidance on your specific legal issue is to contact a lawyer. To schedule a meeting with an attorney, please call 866-540-5505 or complete the intake form to email us.
Alec J. Berin - Associate

PA Philadelphia | 866-540-5505

Alfonso Vilaboa - Of Counsel

NJ Hoboken |

Anika S. Keuning - Project Analyst

CA San Diego | 866-540-5505

Anna D’Agostino - Associate

NY New York City | 866-540-5505

Betsy Ferling-Hitriz - Legal Assistant

CT Chester | 866-540-5505

Bruce D. Parke - Partners

PA Philadelphia | 866-540-5505

Caroline Soper - Project Analyst

NY New York City | 866-540-5505

Christopher A. Miller - Associate

PA Philadelphia | 866-540-5505

Deborah C. England - Of Counsel

CA San Francisco | 866-540-5505

Edward H. Glenn - Of Counsel

NY New York City | 866-540-5505

Edward M. Fitzgerald - Staff Attorney

CA Los Angeles | 866-540-5505

Elena M. DiBattista - Legal Assistant

FL Fort Lauderdale | 866-540-5505

Elise M. Wilson - Project Analyst

NY New York City | 866-540-5505

Eric L. Young - Of Counsel

PA Philadelphia | 866-540-5505

Finn M. Mutrux - Office Staff

CA Los Angeles | 866-540-5505

Gina S. Demetriades - Office Staff

CT Chester | 866-540-5505

Heidi A. Wendel - Of Counsel

NY New York City | 866-540-5505

James C. Shah - Partners

CA Los Angeles | 866-540-5505

James E. Miller - Partners

CT Chester | 866-540-5505

Jayne A. Goldstein - Partners

FL Fort Lauderdale | 866-540-5505

Jillian M. Boyce - Office Staff

CT Chester | 866-540-5505

Jocelyn McNamara - Project Analyst

NY New York City | 866-540-5505

Johanna C. Richter - Law Clerk

PA Philadelphia | 866-540-5505

John C. Roberts - Associate

PA Philadelphia | 866-540-5505

Jonathan Dilger - Office Staff

NY New York City | 866-540-5505

Julie M. Capito - Legal Assistant

CA San Francisco | 866-540-5505

Katie Edwards - Legal Assistant

PA Philadelphia | 866-540-5505

Kolin C. Tang - Partners

CA San Diego | 866-540-5505

Laurie Rubinow - Partners

CT Chester | 866-540-5505

Madison Gregg - Associate

NY New York City | 866-540-5505

Marialisa Samo - Legal Assistant

CA San Diego | 866-540-5505

Mark Xiao - Associate

NY New York City | 866-540-5505

Natalie Finkelman Bennett - Partners

PA Philadelphia | 866-540-5505

Nathan C. Zipperian - Partners

FL Fort Lauderdale | 866-540-5505

Nicholas Day - Of Counsel

NJ Hoboken | 866-540-5505

Nicholas K. Ono - Project Analyst

NY New York City | 866-540-5505

Raffaele Scalcione - Of Counsel

IT Milan | 866-540-5505

Reilly K. Powers - Project Analyst

PA Philadelphia | 866-540-5505

Robert W. Biela - Staff Attorney

PA Philadelphia | 866-540-5505

Ronald S. Kravitz - Of Counsel

CA San Francisco | 866-540-5505

Rrita Osmani - Project Analyst

CT Chester | 866-540-5505

Shuping Li - Project Analyst

NY New York City | 866-540-5505

Stephen T. Rutkowski - Law Clerk

CT Chester | 866-540-5505

Sue Moss - Legal Assistant

PA Philadelphia | 866-540-5505

Sydney D. Finlay - Associate

CA San Diego | 866-540-5505

Tina Moukoulis - Staff Attorney

PA Philadelphia | 866-540-5505