Complete Labor Law Poster for $24.95
from www.LaborLawCenter.com, includes
State, Federal, & OSHA posting requirements

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Compensation for unused accrued Paid Time Off in CA California

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

  • Compensation for unused accrued Paid Time Off in CA California

    Hi folks,

    I have worked for a firm through a temporary agency for 6 mo. I was given 1.54 hours of PTO accrued per week, which I now have 17 hours left. My last day is Wednesday, and I'm starting a permanent job next week.

    I was told by the temp agency that I will not be compensate for unused accrued PTO. In CA, this is not legal unless it was laid out in the employment agreement.
    See http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/fa...ml?lawCode=LAB

    However, the employment agreement I signed was with the firm. I was hired by the firm and given an employment offer/agreement, and signed it. It stated that I would be paid through the agency. I was not given notice of any employment terms through the agency. The firm's policy is to compensate for unused PTO in the last paycheck.

    I am going to speak to HR about this, but would like any insight anyone can offer before I do so.
    Last edited by kg0192!; 07-13-2014, 06:44 PM.

  • #2
    Your employer was probably the temp agency, not the firm, and the DLS does state that temporary employees can be lawfully excluded from a vacation plan. Does the temp agency offer any paid vacation time?

    http://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/faq_vacation.htm

    You would need to have the "employment agreement" reviewed by a local attorney to determine whether or not it rises to the level of an enforceable contract. The vast majority of them do not.
    Last edited by Marketeer; 07-14-2014, 05:20 AM.
    I am not able to respond to private messages. Thanks!

    Comment


    • #3
      The other possibility is if you are going from temp to perm with the same company, that time will just roll over to your new status. That is legal as well.
      I post with the full knowledge and support of my employer, though the opinions rendered are my own and not necessarily representative of their position. In other words, I'm a free agent.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by ElleMD View Post
        The other possibility is if you are going from temp to perm with the same company, that time will just roll over to your new status. That is legal as well.
        The new position is with a different firm.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Marketeer View Post
          Your employer was probably the temp agency, not the firm, and the DLS does state that temporary employees can be lawfully excluded from a vacation plan. Does the temp agency offer any paid vacation time?

          http://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/faq_vacation.htm

          You would need to have the "employment agreement" reviewed by a local attorney to determine whether or not it rises to the level of an enforceable contract. The vast majority of them do not.
          Yes, the employer was third party agency. It offers PTO/vacation time, which is what we're discussing. I'm not sure why that wasn't clear to you.

          The point of mentioning the employment agreement with the firm is that I never received one from the agency. I can only be held to the terms to which I agreed, and without a writing, that would be the generic terms required by law. The point of a lack of a written agreement with the agency is not whether there is an "enforceable contract" but whether there is a writing which provides the a legal exception to the CA code disallowing forfeiture of an employee's PTO compensation upon termination.

          Thanks.
          Last edited by kg0192!; 07-14-2014, 07:36 AM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by kg0192! View Post
            Yes, the employer was third party agency. It offers PTO/vacation time, which is what we're discussing. I'm not sure why that wasn't clear to you.
            Because when you use the passive voice ("I was given 1.54 hours of PTO accrued per week, which I now have 17 hours left."), it obscures the subject of the sentence and the person or agency doing the action. That's a cardinal rule of grammar that could be helpful to you in the future.
            I am not able to respond to private messages. Thanks!

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Marketeer View Post
              Because when you use the passive voice ("I was given 1.54 hours of PTO accrued per week, which I now have 17 hours left."), it obscures the subject of the sentence and the person or agency doing the action. That's a cardinal rule of grammar that could be helpful to you in the future.
              That's great. It's unclear to me why you would default to a nonsensical assumption where the firm is giving me PTO while I am employed through a third party.

              Do you have any insight to offer?

              Thanks

              Comment


              • #8
                It is not uncommon for the company were you work to grant benefits such as time off apart from the agency.
                I post with the full knowledge and support of my employer, though the opinions rendered are my own and not necessarily representative of their position. In other words, I'm a free agent.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Fantastic.

                  Now that the question is clear, does anyone have a productive contribution?

                  Thank you.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Probably not, as you've thoroughly pissed off the volunteers who support this board with your attitude.
                    I am not able to respond to private messages. Thanks!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      it's not entirely clear just who is your employer...it seems the temp agency is your offical employer?

                      I'm not up on CA issues , which are a bit odd, an employer need not grant PTO but if it does it vests. And apparently you were granted some PTO and used some of same with some left over? To me being granted some by somebody tips the point in your favor...it's there and vested.

                      Odd are you need to file a wage claim against your actual employer via the state DOL steps. The actual site HR staff may not be able or willing to help you ..and in a way if they are not your employer it's not their beef.

                      Comment

                      The LaborLawTalk.com forum is intended for informational use only and should not be relied upon and is not a substitute for legal advice. The information contained on LaborLawTalk.com are opinions and suggestions of members and is not a representation of the opinions of LaborLawTalk.com. LaborLawTalk.com does not warrant or vouch for the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any postings or the qualifications of any person responding. Please consult a legal expert or seek the services of an attorney in your area for more accuracy on your specific situation.
                      Working...
                      X