Employer defeats class certification with evidence not common to all class members

Class certification is a critical decision in wage and hour cases. In a victory for employers, a California court of appeal recently held that class certification wasn't supported in a case brought by former employees even though (1) the employer's policy was silent on some of the specific meal and rest break obligations under the California Labor Code but was otherwise compliant and (2) the written policy was unlawful on its face but there was evidence that it wasn't uniformly enforced.

Background information and procedural history

Former employees David Cacho and Regina Silva asserted class claims against Eurostar, Inc. Cacho and Silva, who worked in Warehouse Shoe Sale stores in California, alleged that Eurostar failed to provide compliant meal and rest breaks and required employees to work off the clock. The company has 69 stores in California and roughly 2,500 nonexempt employees.

The trial court denied class certification, finding common issues of law and fact did not predominate. In particular, the court found that Cacho and Silva couldn't establish the meal and rest break claims by common proof. The employees appealed the court's decision, arguing that Eurostar's policies should have supported class treatment. In making their argument, they relied on the tenets of the Brinker Restaurant Corp. decision.

The 2nd District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's denial of class certification. The court of appeal agreed with the lower court that Eurostar's policies alone couldn't support a determination of liability on a classwide basis.