The Sixth District Court of Appeal's recent ruling in Camp v. Home Depot has brought into question the validity of time rounding policies in California. While employers have historically relied on neutral rounding systems, the court's decision indicates potential liability for unpaid wages if an employee can demonstrate that the policy disadvantaged them in any particular pay period. In this case, Home Depot's rounding policy rounded time punches to the nearest quarter-hour, resulting in some employees losing minutes of work time. Click here for article.
The ruling challenges the validity of time rounding policies even if they are neutral in application.
Home Depot's policy rounded employees’ time punches to the nearest quarter-hour.
A 10% sample analysis of time and pay records showed that 43.4% of shifts resulted in employees losing minutes of work time due to rounding.
The court reversed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment, concluding that there was a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the rounding policy deprived the plaintiff of wages.
Recent decisions from the California Supreme Court emphasize that employees must be paid for all time worked, even if it is de minimus.
The decision raises questions about the viability of class action claims for rounding policies, as the same policy resulted in no liability for some employees and potential liability for others.
The ruling does not outright prohibit all rounding practices but calls for a re-evaluation of existing policies to ensure compliance.
Comments