Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Final time sheet of fired employee California

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Final time sheet of fired employee California

    I fired an employee on Tuesday and have yet to receive her time sheet so I can cut her final paycheck. She was told the day she was fired to provide her time sheet. I also spoke to her yesterday, left another message later in the day yesterday, and left a final message this morning. What are my obligations when the fired employee will not give me her time sheet?

  • #2
    To pay her to the best of your ability. Estimate, if necessary. But the law in your state is very hard on employers who do not make timely payments, and "she didn't submit her time sheet" will not be considered a good excuse.

    Estimate low, if you have to estimate. If she's not paid for all the time she worked, you'll hear from her soon enough, and you can more easily cut a second check than you can get her to repay an overpayment. Be sure you've documented your attempts to get her time sheet so you can show the DLSE, if necessary, that you did try.

    Don't forget that you are required by state law to pay out any earned but unused vacation, unconditionally.
    The above answer, whatever it is, assumes that no legally binding and enforceable contract or CBA says otherwise. If it does, then the terms of the contract or CBA apply.

    Comment


    • #3
      You may also end up paying waiting time penalties.
      "The most patriotic people in America are the working class" - Cecil Roberts - President UMWA

      Comment


      • #4
        Maybe. But in this SPECIFIC set of circumstances I doubt it. The employee does have SOME responsibility.
        The above answer, whatever it is, assumes that no legally binding and enforceable contract or CBA says otherwise. If it does, then the terms of the contract or CBA apply.

        Comment


        • #5
          Agreed. I had an employee who deliberately failed to tell the employer (us) their actual hours worked for the last pay period. The employer (us) made a best guess payment with a note requesting to be notified if this was not correct. The employee waited 30 days, then filed a wage claim for the unpaid time. We (the employer) paid the unpaid time as soon as we found out about it from CA-DLSE. The employee asked for 30 days of penalties and CA-DLSE not only did not give it to them, but made some pointed remarks about the employee's lack of moral character.

          The exact wording of the late payment penalty law makes it very clear that the penalty is not automatic, but is entirely at the discretion of CA-DLSE. Employees who want to actually get paid the penalty want to be able to show that they made a good faith effort to get paid in time. Not telling the employer what hours worked are until after the 30 day clock expires arguably does not show good faith. By the same token, the employer also wants to show good faith, hence CBG's "Estimate, if necessary" comment. Paying nothing means that the employer thinks that nothing is due. If this is not true, then the employer just hurt themselves should CA-DLSE become involved.
          "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away".
          Philip K. **** (1928-1982)

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by DAW View Post
            Agreed. I had an employee who deliberately failed to tell the employer (us) their actual hours worked for the last pay period. The employer (us) made a best guess payment with a note requesting to be notified if this was not correct. The employee waited 30 days, then filed a wage claim for the unpaid time. We (the employer) paid the unpaid time as soon as we found out about it from CA-DLSE. The employee asked for 30 days of penalties and CA-DLSE not only did not give it to them, but made some pointed remarks about the employee's lack of moral character.
            This situation you cite is different because the employer made an attempt at paying the employee correctly. In the situation discussed in this thread the employer made no attempt to pay the employee.

            Originally posted by DAW View Post
            The exact wording of the late payment penalty law makes it very clear that the penalty is not automatic, but is entirely at the discretion of CA-DLSE. Employees who want to actually get paid the penalty want to be able to show that they made a good faith effort to get paid in time.
            This is false in the case of a termination. I don't know what you mean about the penalty not being "automatic." The employer has to show that there was a good faith dispute to get out of waiting time penalties. The employee has no obligation to show that they made, as you say, "a good faith effort" to recover wages that should have been paid upon termination. This is only true in a situation of a quit without 72 hours notice. It is the employer responsibility to pay you upon termination not the the employees responsibility to be paid upon termination.

            Originally posted by DAW
            Not telling the employer what hours worked are until after the 30 day clock expires arguably does not show good faith.
            That may show that the employee was avoiding receiving payment. "Good faith" has nothing to do with it. However the employer still needs to pay the employee what they reasonably believe to be the wages earned upon termination.

            Originally posted by DAW
            Paying nothing means that the employer thinks that nothing is due. If this is not true, then the employer just hurt themselves should CA-DLSE become involved.
            Exactly

            Originally posted by cbg
            Maybe. But in this SPECIFIC set of circumstances I doubt it. The employee does have SOME responsibility.
            Doubt it all you want but unless the employee was paid what the employer reasonably believes to be wages earned up to and including the date of termination then waiting penalties would apply.
            "The most patriotic people in America are the working class" - Cecil Roberts - President UMWA

            Comment


            • #7
              When were you hired as an ALJ for the DLSE?

              Oh, you weren't? Then you cannot say with certainty whether they would or not.

              It is not your decision to make. Your opinion is not binding on the DLSE.
              The above answer, whatever it is, assumes that no legally binding and enforceable contract or CBA says otherwise. If it does, then the terms of the contract or CBA apply.

              Comment


              • #8
                cbg

                I'm no ALJ, just someone who knows what they're talking about and doesn't just spew out inaccurate information to every person here asking a question. You're very quick to tell every person that asks a questin they're SOL without even getting all the information. Do some research before you speak. It really upsets you when someone disagrees with you, doesn't it? Any maturity you have goes right out the window. You've ran almost every employment law attorney and other experts off of this forum with your controlling know-it-all attitude. And no payroll personnel are not "experts in pay issues" as you put it. They are simply clerks who issue pay checks as instructed by the employer. They are no more experts than the average person.

                You have a very poor understanding of wage and hour laws in California. I don't care how many paychecks you have issued in the sate, that does not make you an "expert." I am not "deciding" this case, as you put it, nor is this simply an "opinion" of mine. It is written in law and the DLSE interprets it as I have stated.

                It was very poorly thought out advice to give to the OP to "estimate low." If the employer does not pay all wages believed to be owed then they will still pay waiting time penalties. So if you're not going to pay everything you know is owed to them then to hell with it, just wait until the employee gets in contact with you.

                With all that being said, go ahead and ban me now as I'm sure you will just as you have with everyone else who has ever spoken out against you. Go ahead prove your immaturity. This web site must be the only thing you have in your life.
                "The most patriotic people in America are the working class" - Cecil Roberts - President UMWA

                Comment


                • #9
                  From the CA-DLSE manual:

                  4.2.2 If it is determined that a good faith dispute exists as to whether any wages are due (even if, after resolution of the dispute wages are found to be due), the employer’s failure to pay is not willful, and the employee is not entitled to waiting time penalties. The concept of a good faith defense to Section 203 penalties is supported by existing case law. (Davis v. Morris (1940) 37 Cal.App.2d 269) It must be shown that the employer owes the debt and has failed to pay it. The employer is not denied any legal defense as to the validity of the claim . (Barnhill v. Saunders (1981) 125 Cal.App.3d 1)
                  "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away".
                  Philip K. **** (1928-1982)

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Okay. Whats your point? Are you stating that a "good faith dispute" exists about the employee being owed any wages at all?
                    "The most patriotic people in America are the working class" - Cecil Roberts - President UMWA

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      mcarson87. You seem to have a bit of a chip on you shoulder for something. You have some valid issues that could be considered by DLSE. But, you also have some very bad misconceptions. Penalties are, in fact, not automatic.

                      You state "The employer has to show that there was a good faith dispute to get out of waiting time penalties." Well, yes and no - this depends an awful lot on what kind of case the employee can show -- and most employees have opinions rather than an actual case with actual evidence.

                      There are many cases in our state in which the employer has wronged the employee and will be correctly penalized. There are also quite a number of cases now arising in which substandard employees, obtaining advice from a variety of sources, are trying to game the system to penalize the employer when the employer has done nothing wrong.

                      You are also challenging a moderator to ban you. Here's a suggestion: If you don't like this forum, just go away on your own. If you want to be involved and contribute, chill out a little, and there would be no interest by anyone in banning you.
                      Please post questions on the forum rather than sending me a private message or email. That way others who have similar issues have access to the discussion.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I have not banned you, nor have I even suggested that you be banned. Outside of spammers, I have banned very few people on this site. I suspect I know from whom you are getting your misconceptions of me from and yes, he was banned. Several times. And not always (or even first) by me. But there have been very few others.

                        If at some point in future you are banned, it will not be, as your suspected informant no doubt has told you, because you disagree with me. If it happens at all, and so far you are the only one who has suggested it will happen, it will be because you are posting inaccurate information and arguing about it.

                        When I said there were experts on CA pay laws on these boards, I was not talking about myself. But they are here, and at least one of them has posted in this thread. More than one of them has posted in every thread you've contributed to.

                        The state of CA has made it abundantly clear that the decision on penalties is theirs and theirs alone, and it will be made on a review of ALL the facts. Not just the facts that cast the employer in a bad light, as you seem to believe.
                        The above answer, whatever it is, assumes that no legally binding and enforceable contract or CBA says otherwise. If it does, then the terms of the contract or CBA apply.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          mccarson87

                          HTML Code:
                          [I]"And no payroll personnel are not "experts in pay issues" as you put it. They are simply clerks who issue pay checks as instructed by the employer. They are no more experts than the average person."[/I]
                          I have 20 years in payroll with a BS, MPA, CPP. And yes, I am an expert in pay issues.

                          Thank you for reminding the payroll professionals that they don't know any more the average person. I now have a new goal.

                          My goal is to be just like you since you are so smart. What do you do if I may ask and what are your credentials?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Hey, PRJeff, welcome! Nice to see you here. It's me.

                            And if I may add my credentials to PRJeff's.

                            I have a BA, have held my CPP (Certified Payroll Professional) for over 20 years and have over 30 years of experience in payroll, taxes, and wage and hour compliance. I have managed the payroll operations for large national companies and a large city government with payrolls of over $100 million per year and 17,000 employees in every state in the country and multiple foreign countries.

                            So, yes, I too am an "expert in pay issues".
                            Last edited by Pattymd; 09-04-2009, 01:09 PM.
                            I don't respond to Private Messages unless the moderator specifically refers you to me for that purpose. Thank you.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by mcarson87 View Post
                              I'm no ALJ, just someone who knows what they're talking about and doesn't just spew out inaccurate information to every person here asking a question. You're very quick to tell every person that asks a questin they're SOL without even getting all the information. Do some research before you speak. It really upsets you when someone disagrees with you, doesn't it? Any maturity you have goes right out the window. You've ran almost every employment law attorney and other experts off of this forum with your controlling know-it-all attitude. And no payroll personnel are not "experts in pay issues" as you put it. They are simply clerks who issue pay checks as instructed by the employer. They are no more experts than the average person.

                              You have a very poor understanding of wage and hour laws in California. I don't care how many paychecks you have issued in the sate, that does not make you an "expert." I am not "deciding" this case, as you put it, nor is this simply an "opinion" of mine. It is written in law and the DLSE interprets it as I have stated.

                              It was very poorly thought out advice to give to the OP to "estimate low." If the employer does not pay all wages believed to be owed then they will still pay waiting time penalties. So if you're not going to pay everything you know is owed to them then to hell with it, just wait until the employee gets in contact with you.

                              With all that being said, go ahead and ban me now as I'm sure you will just as you have with everyone else who has ever spoken out against you. Go ahead prove your immaturity. This web site must be the only thing you have in your life.

                              Sorry to get off topic a moment. I just want to say to "mcarson87" I really, really LIKE you.

                              I hope no one minds me saying that to a fellow message board poster.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X