Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Paycheck not received on time. California

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

  • Paycheck not received on time. California

    I worked 3 days for this company and quit without notice. I didn't pick up my paycheck and i didn't call them to mail it to me either. I should've received the check by the second week of January, but they're just mailing it to me now, and it's April 25. Am i entitled to receive a waiting penalty from the company?
    Last edited by clearbead; 04-25-2008, 03:58 PM.

  • #2
    Maybe. You can certainly file a wage claim. You can certainly tell your story. The former employer can certainly also tell their story. CA-DLSE will then make a decision after listening to both sides.

    http://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/FAQ_WaitingTimePenalty.htm
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away".
    Philip K. **** (1928-1982)

    Comment


    • #3
      clearbead: I quit without notice and didn't pick up my paycheck, and i didn't call them to mail it to me either.

      And you think you are entitled to waiting time penalties, why?
      Barry S. Phillips, CPA
      www.BarryPhillips.com

      IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: This response is intended to provide general information and written for educational purposes only. It does not establish a client relationship. This communication is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding tax-related penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to any party any matters addressed herein.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by clearbead View Post
        I worked 3 days for this company and quit without notice. I didn't pick up my paycheck and i didn't call them to mail it to me either. I should've received the check by the second week of January, but they're just mailing it to me now, and it's April 25. Am i entitled to receive a waiting penalty from the company?
        let me clarify. I am speaking about practical terms and how the labor board views these matters. They are extremely harsh with employers who do make an effort to get the final paycheck in the employees hands. Say there was an altercation, would you want the employee to drive back to the employer to get his check?
        Last edited by CaliforniaLaborLaw; 04-26-2008, 02:34 PM. Reason: clarification
        Walter

        www.Californialaborlaw.info
        "California Wage and Hour Class Action Attorneys"

        Disclaimer: The above correspondence does not constitute legal advice nor establish an attorney-client relationship. You should seek the advice of independent legal counsel before relying upon, acting upon or not acting upon any information contained in this correspondence.

        Comment


        • #5
          CaliforniaLaborLaw: The employer should have sent the check certified mail to your last known address

          Says who? The place of final wage payment for employees who quit without giving 72 hours prior notice and without specifically requesting that their final wages be mailed to them, is at the office of the employer within the county in which the work was performed. Labor Code Section 208.

          CaliforniaLaborLaw: Your employer should have made a good faith effort to have you pick it up.

          There is law that requires "your employer to make a good faith effort to have you pick up your pay check." I am not sure what that means anyway? Is the employer expected to track a terminated employee down and tell him/her the final paycheck is ready for pick up. I think not.

          Bottom Line: By the OP's own admission, he quit without notice, didn't pick up his final paycheck, and didn't call his employer to request his final check be mailed to him. It is hard for me to envision that the DLSE will award LC 203 penalties. It's even harder for me to envision that any lawyer would take his case.
          Barry S. Phillips, CPA
          www.BarryPhillips.com

          IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: This response is intended to provide general information and written for educational purposes only. It does not establish a client relationship. This communication is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding tax-related penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to any party any matters addressed herein.

          Comment


          • #6
            Agreed. There is nothing automatic about the waiting time penalties. The employee can always file a wage claim. It costs nothing and it might work. But I have been on the other side of these things (the employer side) and in my experience CA-DLSE awards penalties when they see employer misconduct, not when the employee tries to game the system.
            "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away".
            Philip K. **** (1928-1982)

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by DAW View Post
              Agreed. There is nothing automatic about the waiting time penalties. The employee can always file a wage claim. It costs nothing and it might work. But I have been on the other side of these things (the employer side) and in my experience CA-DLSE awards penalties when they see employer misconduct, not when the employee tries to game the system.
              Trust me, just because there is a labor code does not mean all judges especially the labor board admin judges always follow it. Test it and ye shall see. Courts are courts of equity. Regardless, of the code or your interpretation of it, when you walk in with as an employer, and your employee walks in unemployed, and with no paycheck and states you made no effort to get it to him/her and to that day still have not, and he left on hostile terms and "was afraid to come back" you can try to rely on the labor code but will likely be on thin ice making no effort to get his check in his hands.
              Walter

              www.Californialaborlaw.info
              "California Wage and Hour Class Action Attorneys"

              Disclaimer: The above correspondence does not constitute legal advice nor establish an attorney-client relationship. You should seek the advice of independent legal counsel before relying upon, acting upon or not acting upon any information contained in this correspondence.

              Comment


              • #8
                Where does the poster say that he was afraid to come back? Where, for that matter, does he say that he is still unemployed?
                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


                • #9
                  Originally posted by cbg View Post
                  Where does the poster say that he was afraid to come back? Where, for that matter, does he say that he is still unemployed?
                  My comments were illustrative of events that can occur when you walk into the labor board. Things that can occur in otherwords, beyond the labor code, or theories of justice discussed on the internet.
                  Walter

                  www.Californialaborlaw.info
                  "California Wage and Hour Class Action Attorneys"

                  Disclaimer: The above correspondence does not constitute legal advice nor establish an attorney-client relationship. You should seek the advice of independent legal counsel before relying upon, acting upon or not acting upon any information contained in this correspondence.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    CaliforniaLaborLaw: My comments were illustrative of events that can occur when you walk into the labor board. Things that can occur in otherwords, beyond the labor code, or theories of justice discussed on the internet.

                    Walter, give up the ghost. Based on what the OP admitted (e.g., he quit without notice, made no effort to go and pick up his check, and didn't call the company and ask that it be mailed), he doesn't have a snowball's chance of getting LC 203 penalties. If you feel otherwise, you may want to reach out and offer to represent him - "theories of justice" and all.
                    Barry S. Phillips, CPA
                    www.BarryPhillips.com

                    IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: This response is intended to provide general information and written for educational purposes only. It does not establish a client relationship. This communication is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding tax-related penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to any party any matters addressed herein.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by BSPCPA View Post
                      CaliforniaLaborLaw: My comments were illustrative of events that can occur when you walk into the labor board. Things that can occur in otherwords, beyond the labor code, or theories of justice discussed on the internet.

                      Walter, give up the ghost. Based on what the OP admitted (e.g., he quit without notice, made no effort to go and pick up his check, and didn't call the company and ask that it be mailed), he doesn't have a snowball's chance of getting LC 203 penalties. If you feel otherwise, you may want to reach out and offer to represent him - "theories of justice" and all.
                      We love guys like you in court, presumptuous..you are the type that typically has to start finding a lawyer for an appeal..because you are "sure" the judge was wrong and you cannot believe that he did not follow the code.
                      Walter

                      www.Californialaborlaw.info
                      "California Wage and Hour Class Action Attorneys"

                      Disclaimer: The above correspondence does not constitute legal advice nor establish an attorney-client relationship. You should seek the advice of independent legal counsel before relying upon, acting upon or not acting upon any information contained in this correspondence.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        CaliforniaLaborLaw: We love guys like you in court, presumptuous..you are the type that typically has to start finding a lawyer for an appeal..because you are "sure" the judge was wrong and you cannot believe that he did not follow the code.

                        Don't pick a fight with me, Walt. And for the record, when I am in court or involved court proceedings, my track record is impeccable.
                        Barry S. Phillips, CPA
                        www.BarryPhillips.com

                        IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: This response is intended to provide general information and written for educational purposes only. It does not establish a client relationship. This communication is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding tax-related penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to any party any matters addressed herein.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by BSPCPA View Post
                          CaliforniaLaborLaw: We love guys like you in court, presumptuous..you are the type that typically has to start finding a lawyer for an appeal..because you are "sure" the judge was wrong and you cannot believe that he did not follow the code.

                          Don't pick a fight with me, Walt. And for the record, when I am in court or involved court proceedings, my track record is impeccable.
                          Not picking a fight, Barry. I am just trying to demonstrate, that there are many many instances, where judges or labor boards absolutely do not follow the code, and instead determine who was "most reaonsonable" and award on that basis. In the instance of a check being left on a table in an office, regardless of code, it would look much better if an employer could state in the event he was hit with an 203 claim that "hey I had my secretary send an email or a letter to the employee when we noticed he never followed up to get his check as the code states." Trust me, that will give the employer a leg up on reasonableness score that all officers of the court seem to rely upon more times than not.
                          Walter

                          www.Californialaborlaw.info
                          "California Wage and Hour Class Action Attorneys"

                          Disclaimer: The above correspondence does not constitute legal advice nor establish an attorney-client relationship. You should seek the advice of independent legal counsel before relying upon, acting upon or not acting upon any information contained in this correspondence.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            CaliforniaLaborLaw: It would look much better for the employer if he could state in the event he was hit with an 203 claim that "hey, I had my secretary send an email or a letter to the employee when we noticed he never followed up to get his check."

                            I agree. It would even look better if the employer drove the check to the employees house and slipped it under his front door - neither actions are required (or even suggested) by the LC.

                            Lest you think I am trying to pick a fight with you (I am not), my concern is that sometimes employees act in irresponsible ways to their own detriment (like the OP seemingly did here) and then try to cash-in on their irresposnibility. There are some regular board member's who provide standard advice that is tantamount to "hey, file a claim, you've got nothing to loose," regardless of the merits to the case.

                            I am sympathetic to the plight to aggrieved workers who suffer at the hand of unscrupulous employers. Testament to that is evidenced by the fact I routinely serve as an expert witness in high stakes, class action, wage & hour matters in support of the class. However, it's hard for me to get behind the "file a claim, you've got nothing loose" mentality of some members here. You and I both know the DLSE is severly backlogged with legitmate LC 203 claims.

                            Peace
                            Barry S. Phillips, CPA
                            www.BarryPhillips.com

                            IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: This response is intended to provide general information and written for educational purposes only. It does not establish a client relationship. This communication is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding tax-related penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to any party any matters addressed herein.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by BSPCPA View Post
                              CaliforniaLaborLaw: It would look much better for the employer if he could state in the event he was hit with an 203 claim that "hey, I had my secretary send an email or a letter to the employee when we noticed he never followed up to get his check."

                              I agree. It would even look better if the employer drove the check to the employees house and slipped it under his front door - neither actions are required (or even suggested) by the LC.

                              Lest you think I am trying to pick a fight with you (I am not), my concern is that sometimes employees act in irresponsible ways to their own detriment (like the OP seemingly did here) and then try to cash-in on their irresposnibility. There are some regular board member's who provide standard advice that is tantamount to "hey, file a claim, you've got nothing to loose," regardless of the merits to the case.

                              I am sympathetic to the plight to aggrieved workers who suffer at the hand of unscrupulous employers. Testament to that is evidenced by the fact I routinely serve as an expert witness in high stakes, class action, wage & hour matters in support of the class. However, it's hard for me to get behind the "file a claim, you've got nothing loose" mentality of some members here. You and I both know the DLSE is severly backlogged with legitmate LC 203 claims.

                              Peace
                              I agree with you that shame claims are frustrating, and my opinion was actually designed to insulate against such claims. Thanks for the dialogue.
                              Walter

                              www.Californialaborlaw.info
                              "California Wage and Hour Class Action Attorneys"

                              Disclaimer: The above correspondence does not constitute legal advice nor establish an attorney-client relationship. You should seek the advice of independent legal counsel before relying upon, acting upon or not acting upon any information contained in this correspondence.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X