Facts

Michael Gonzales worked for Charter Communications as a Field Operations Maintenance Technician (Field Ops Techs). These technicians generally respond to emergency outages in Charter's cable, internet, and telecommunication services infrastructure. Because the position responds to emergency situations, response time is critical and the Field Ops Techs were required to be "on-call" for week-long periods to respond to emergencies outside of their regular work schedule. The techs were assigned 24-hour a day on-call duty according to a rotating schedule so that each of the techs worked on-call for about every four to five weeks. During those weeks they were on-call, the techs would work an additional 128 hours in addition to the regular full-time 40-hour workweek. The pay for the on-call work was a flat rate of about $245 for each week-long on-call period. In addition to the on-call pay, if the techs were called in and actually had to report to a specific location while on-call, they would also receive "call-out pay" in addition to the on-call pay. The call-out pay was 1.5 times the tech's regular rate of pay, and regardless of how many hours the job took, the tech would receive a minimum of two hours of call-out pay. Gonzales, filed a collective action suit against Charter alleging wage and hour violations under the Fair Labor Standards Act, including unpaid wages and overtime compensation.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff contended that because of defendant's strict on-call requirements, defendant failed to pay for overtime hours worked. While working on-call, the techs still had to abide by the restrictions required for their position such as being accessible via their cell phone, uniform requirements and reporting and response times. Moreover, techs were required to be by or in their Charter-owned vehicles, or bucket trucks, during the time they were on-call. As such, the techs parked and kept the bucket trucks at their residences and were required to perform, on a daily basis, certain inspection requirements on the truck. Defendant's excessive degree of control during on-call periods effectively meant that defendant only paid approximately $1.91 per on-call hour when the $245 per on-call, flat-rate compensation was divided equally when plaintiffs worked the 128 on-call hours.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: Defendant contended that plaintiffs were not required to take the bucket truck home while on call and sometimes, the techs took the truck home even if not on call for various reasons, for example, reduction of commute time. Moreover, techs gained a financial benefit from taking the truck home because they could avoid paying for gas and wear and tear on their own, personal vehicles. When on-call, the trucks could also be used for non-business purposes, of which plaintiff Gonzales did so by driving the bucket truck to the casino, grocery store, gym, or visiting friends. As to the inspection requirement, it was a safety check that required a minimal amount of time to conduct and experienced techs could do the check in about 30 seconds. If significant problems were found during the safety check, techs were supposed to clock-in and get paid for time spent addressing the problem.

Result

The judge ruled for defendant Charter Communications, finding that it was not obligated to compensate Gonzales for the time spent conducting the safety checks while using the bucket truck for non-business reasons while on-call.