|
P1285 In a putative class action based on the claim that defendant failed to pay overtime to truck drivers in its employ and to which defendant interposed a defense based on federal law regarding employment in interstate commerce, drivers who regularly cross state lines on the job should be excluded from the class; whether drivers who do not regularly do so are involved in interstate commerce depends on the nature of the employer's business, and this is a question that can properly be decided in a class action; the claim that the employer's policy regarding vacation pay was deceptive, because it promised payment for a certain number of weeks but actually paid a flat rate that had nothing to do with what the employee earned in a week, was also appropriate for class determination, since the employer's policy was applied to all class members.CitationBELL v SUPERIOR COURT (Interstate Drivers) 158 CA4 147 [See: CCP 382; Sav-On v Superior Court 34 C4 319, P/AT 11/04; Aguiar v Cintas 144 CA4 121, P/AT 11/06; Gentry v Superior Court 42 C4 443, P/AT 11/07]
|
|
