Are California Employees Protected from 24/7 On-Call Requirements?

Dusty Coupwood, a former senior social media analyst and content creator for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), filed a lawsuit alleging illegal employment practices related to continuous on-call requirements in alleged violation of California Labor Laws.

The Case: Dusty Coupwood v. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, Inc.

The Court: Los Angeles County Superior Court

The Case No.: 25STCV12374

The Plaintiff: Dusty Coupwood v. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals

Dusty Coupwood began his employment with PETA in March 2020, fulfilling a role demanding substantial responsibility as a senior social media analyst and content creator. According to Coupwood, he was expected to comply with PETA's rigorous 24/7 on-call policy that mandated constant availability and frequent engagement with work tasks beyond standard work hours. According to the plaintiff, the policy resulted in Coupwood putting in from 55-60 hours per week. Despite the excessive hours, Coupwood claims that he was only compensated for time actively spent on tasks, which resulted in significant unpaid wages (regular and overtime).

The Defendant: Dusty Coupwood v. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, Inc.

The defendant, commonly called PETA, is known globally for its animal rights advocacy. However, in this instance, the group finds themselves accused of bad behavior, or more specifically, violating various California labor laws. Allegations brought forward by Coupwood detail that PETA's employment policies required constant employee availability and participation in work tasks without adequate compensation, neglected meal and rest breaks, and engaged in retaliatory behaviors against employees who challenged these practices or sought unionization.

The Case: Dusty Coupwood v. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, Inc.

Filed on April 28, 2025, in the Los Angeles County Superior Court, this lawsuit highlights critical issues regarding employer obligations under California labor laws. Coupwood's claims include unpaid wages and overtime, denial of meal and rest periods, inadequate expense reimbursement, and retaliation resulting in wrongful termination. Other employees also filed wage and hour complaints against PETA. After the series of complaints were filed, PETA allegedly terminated several employees involved, creating what the plaintiff describes as a hostile work environment that forced him to resign in July 2024. PETA denies the allegations, asserting that Coupwood's claims lack merit and vowing to vigorously contest the lawsuit.

Can Employers in California Require Employees to be “On Call” 24/7?

Employers in California may require employees to be on-call; however, specific conditions must be met:

• Employees must receive compensation for on-call time if restrictions significantly limit their personal activities.

• An employer is required to pay employees overtime wages for any hours they work over 40 in one work week.

• Employers must ensure compliance with mandated meal and rest breaks, even during on-call periods.

Violating labor law can lead to significant legal consequences, as demonstrated by Coupwood's claims against PETA.

If you need to discuss filing a wage and hour complaint, contact Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced and knowledgeable employment law attorneys are ready to assist you at one of their various law firm offices in Riverside, San Francisco, Sacramento, San Diego, Los Angeles, and Chicago.

Exela Enterprise and Novitex Face Class Action Over Alleged Meal and Rest Break Violations

A class action lawsuit has been filed against Exela Enterprise Solutions, Inc. and Novitex Government Solutions, LLC, alleging violations of California labor laws related to meal and rest breaks. 

Case: Merclyn Brown v. Exela Enterprise Solutions, Inc. & Novitex Government Solutions

Court: Los Angeles County Superior Court

Case No. 24STCV31304

The Plaintiff: Merclyn Brown v. Exela Enterprise Solutions, Inc. & Novitex Government Solutions

Plaintiff Merclyn Brown filed the a class action alleging that Exela Enterprise and Novitex systematically vioated California labow laws. Specifically, Brown claims that Exela/Novitex did not provide required meal periods and breaks (or that employees were required to work through their "off duty" breaks without receiving additional compensation).

The Defendant: Merclyn Brown v. Exela Enterprise Solutions, Inc. & Novitex Government Solutions

Exela Enterprise Solutions, Inc. and Novitex Government Solutions, LLC are accused of implementing policies and practices that deny employees their rightful meal and rest periods. The lawsuit alleges that the company institued these practices (and other similar practices) as part of a larger goal to reduce labor costs without concern for protecting their employees' rights.

The Case: Merclyn Brown v. Exela Enterprise Solutions, Inc. & Novitex Government Solutions

The wage and hour lawsuit seeks to represent all non-exempt employees who worked for Exela Enterprise and Novitex in California and were denied proper meal and rest breaks. The plaintiffs seek compensation for unpaid wages, penalties, and other damages caused by the alleged labor law violations.

What Should You Do If You're Denied Meal and Rest Breaks at Work?

Some employers don't provide their employees with legally mandated meal and rest breaks. If you believe your employer falls in this category, document each instance and report the issue to your human resources department. If the problem persists, consider consulting with an employment law attorney to explore your legal options and ensure your rights are protected.

If you need to discuss filing a wage and hour complaint, contact Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced and knowledgeable employment law attorneys are ready to assist you at one of their various law firm offices in Riverside, San Francisco, Sacramento, San Diego, Los Angeles, and Chicago.

Did Superior Plus Energy Violate the California Labor Code?

Michael Adams filed a wage and hour lawsuit in Sacramento County Superior Court, alleging that Superior Plus Energy failed to provide their employees with required meal and rest breaks, violating California labor law and resulting in lost wages and hardship.

The Case: Michael Adams v. Superior Plus Energy

The Court: Sacramento County Superior Court

The Case No.: 24CV023748

The Plaintiff: Who Made the Allegations?

Michael Adams, on his behalf and potentially other similarly situated workers, alleged that Superior Plus Energy did not provide mandatory off-duty meal and rest breaks, essential for safeguarding employee health and ensuring fair wage compensation. Adams' complaint alleged that the company's unsatisfactory break administration practices led to significant wage loss and labor law violations.

Did Superior Plus Energy Violate California Labor Law?

In the recently filed lawsuit, Superior Plus Energy was accused of falling short of its legal obligations to implement sufficient measures to ensure break compliance. While the company might argue that break omissions were isolated errors rather than systemic issues, the plaintiff contends that such practices amount to a deliberate disregard for California labor standards and workers' rights.

The Case: Michael Adams v. Superior Plus Energy

In the case Adams v. Superior Plus Energy, the court must consider if inadequate scheduling causing workers to work without receiving their legally mandated meal breaks and rest periods constitutes a California Labor Law violation. Adams filed the lawsuit seeking to recover unpaid wages and enforce wage and hour law protections. The case serves as a reminder to California employers of the importance of labor law compliance.

What Should You Do If Your Employer Fails to Provide Required Meal and Rest Breaks?

If you suspect your employer is not granting legally mandated meal and rest breaks, document your work hours meticulously, review your pay stubs for discrepancies, report any issues to your HR department, and consider contacting an employment law attorney for guidance about your next steps.

If you need to discuss filing a California wage and hour lawsuit, contact Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced and knowledgeable employment law attorneys are ready to assist you at one of their various law firm offices in Riverside, San Francisco, Sacramento, San Diego, Los Angeles, and Chicago.

Young Life Accused of Overtime Pay Violations in California Class Action

In a class action lawsuit filed in the San Diego County Superior Court, employees claim that Young Life failed to pay overtime wages, depriving them of compensation for hours worked beyond the standard work period.

The Case: Katelyn Lettich v. Young Life

The Court: San Diego County Superior Court

The Case No.: 24CU026517C

Who is the Plaintiff in the Case?

Katelyn Lettich is the plaintiff in the case. Acting for herself and other similarly situated employees, Lettich alleges that Young Life systematically neglected its duty to compensate workers for overtime hours. The California wage and hour lawsuit claims this practice resulted in significant underpayment and violated California's wage and hour laws, leaving the affected employees without full earnings.

Did Young Life Violate California Labor Law?

The defendant, Young Life, is accused of maintaining timekeeping and payroll policies that fell short of California's legal standards. According to the plaintiff, the company's standard practices did not award overtime pay to workers who exceeded the standard workweek. Young Life argues that any cited missed overtime payments were not intentional. They insist that the "isolated errors" did not reflect a broader systemic issue.

The Plaintiff Claims the Company Mismanaged Employee Schedules

According to the lawsuit, the company mismanaged employee work schedules and utilized subpar record keeping. The combination routinely left employees working more than their standard shifts. The additional "unscheduled" hours were not accurately recorded, which left workers without the overtime pay they earned (in compliance with labor law).

The lawsuit seeks to enforce proper wage compensation practices and hold Young Life accountable for potential labor law violations impacting workers' earnings.

What Should You Do If Your Employer Does Not Pay Your Overtime Pay?

If you aren't receiving overtime compensation but you are working overtime hours, you should:

• Document: Meticulously log all the hours you work, including overtime hours.

• Review: Compare your records to the company's records (included on your wage statements) to identify any discrepancies.

• Report: If you notice any discrepancies, immediately raise your concerns with your employer's human resources department.

• Seek Help: If HR does not address your issues, contact a local employment law attorney to explore appropriate legal options.

If you need to discuss filing a wage and hour complaint, contact Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced and knowledgeable employment law attorneys are ready to assist you at one of their various law firm offices in Riverside, San Francisco, Sacramento, San Diego, Los Angeles, and Chicago.

Heal the Bay Wage and Hour Lawsuit: Were California Workers Underpaid?

In a contentious class action lawsuit filed in the Los Angeles County Superior Court, allegations have emerged that Heal the Bay failed to pay its employees the full wages required by California labor law.

The Case: Dana Smith v. Heal the Bay

The Court: Los Angeles County Superior Court of the State of California

The Case No.: 24STCV20893

The Plaintiff: Dana Smith v. Heal the Bay

Dana Smith, on behalf of herself and other similarly situated employees, claims that Heal the Bay consistently underpaid workers by not properly compensating for all hours worked, including overtime and other premium payments mandated by labor law. Smith alleged that timekeeping discrepancies and inaccurate wage calculations led to significant wage losses for many affected employees.

The Defendant: Heal the Bay, a California Nonprofit Organization

The defendant, Heal the Bay, is an environmental nonprofit organization in Los Angeles dedicated to the safety, health, and cleanliness of coastal waters and Los Angeles watersheds. The group uses a combination of community action, advocacy, education, and science to work toward its goals, with its primary focus on Santa Monica Bay. In the complaint, the plaintiff alleged that Heal the Bay failed to comply with wage and hour law through inaccurate timekeeping practices that caused them to neglect to pay their workers in full. Heal the Bay contends that any wage calculation inconsistencies were isolated incidents and should not be considered indicative of a broader failure to meet labor law requirements.

Heal the Bay Wage and Hour Lawsuit: What Lies at the Core?

At the core of the Heal the Bay wage and hour lawsuit is the allegation that employees were systematically shortchanged due to the company's payroll practices. Smith filed the lawsuit to recover unpaid wages and ensure future compliance with California's labor standards, protecting the rights of other workers.

What Can You Do If You Believe You're Not Receiving Full Compensation?

If you suspect that you are not receiving full compensation for all hours worked, start by:

● Documenting Your Hours: Keep detailed records of your work schedule and any breaks.

● Reviewing Pay Stubs: Compare your recorded hours with the amount listed as paid.

● Reporting Discrepancies: Notify your employer of any inconsistencies.

● Seeking Legal Advice: If necessary, consulting with an employment law attorney in your area can help you determine any other possible avenues for resolution.

If you need to discuss filing a wage and hour complaint, contact Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced and knowledgeable employment law attorneys are ready to assist you at one of their various law firm offices in Riverside, San Francisco, Sacramento, San Diego, Los Angeles, and Chicago.

California Wage and Labor Law Violation Claim: Exela Enterprise & Novitex Accused of Denying Meal Breaks

In a class action lawsuit filed in the Los Angeles County Superior Court, employees allege that Exela Enterprise Solutions, Inc. and Novitex Government Solutions violated California labor law when they failed to provide workers with their legally mandated meal breaks, which allegedly resulted in unpaid wages.

The Case: Merclyn Brown v. Exela Enterprise Solutions, Inc. & Novitex Government Solutions

The Court: Los Angeles County Superior Court of the State of California

The Case No.: 24STCV31304

The Plaintiff: Merclyn Brown v. Exela Enterprise Solutions, Inc. & Novitex Government Solutions

The plaintiff, Merclyn Brown, filed a claim on behalf of herself and other similarly situated employees, alleging that the company systematically failed to offer appropriate meal breaks. This allegedly caused workers to lose compensation for the time they worked without receiving their required off-duty breaks and rest periods. According to the complaint, failing to comply with meal and rest break requirements deprived the employer's workers of needed rest and led to significant wage discrepancies and California labor law violations.

The Defendant: Merclyn Brown v. Exela Enterprise Solutions, Inc. & Novitex Government Solutions

Exela Enterprise Solutions, Inc. and Novitex Government Solutions are accused of failing to fulfill their statutory obligations under California employment law by not providing the required meal breaks. The companies argue that any lapses in break administration were isolated incidents; however, the plaintiff maintains that such oversights were part of an ongoing, systemic issue that directly impacted the employees' earnings.

The Case: Merclyn Brown v. Exela Enterprise Solutions, Inc. & Novitex Government Solutions

Brown claims that employees were not given their mandated meal breaks due to inadequate scheduling practices and insufficient staffing, which led to alleged wage violations due to the uncompensated hours. The California wage and hour lawsuit seeks to enforce the workers' statutory rights and ensure all employees are adequately compensated for their hours (in compliance with California labor law).

What Should You Do If Your Employer Does Not Provide Your Legally Required Meal Breaks?

If you believe your California employer isn't providing you with your legally mandated meal breaks, start by meticulously documenting your work hours and any breaks you miss. Next, review your wage statements to find any discrepancies and report any to the company's human resources department. If the matter remains unresolved after you report the issue to HR, consider consulting an employment law attorney to discuss possible legal actions that could help.

If you need to discuss filing a wage and hour complaint, contact Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced and knowledgeable employment law attorneys are ready to assist you at one of their various law firm offices in Riverside, San Francisco, Sacramento, San Diego, Los Angeles, and Chicago.

California Employment Law Violation: Tahona Bar Employees Claim Denied Meal Breaks & Unpaid Wages

In a class action lawsuit filed in the San Diego County Superior Court, employees of Tahona Bar allege that they were systematically denied legally mandated meal breaks, resulting in significant wage losses and undue hardship.

The Case: Veronica Watson v. Tahona Bar

The Court: San Diego County, California Superior Court

The Case No.: 24CU026643C

Who is the Plaintiff in Watson v. Tahona Bar?

Veronica Watson, representing herself and other affected employees, asserts that Tahona Bar consistently failed to provide the required off-duty meal breaks, causing workers to miss out on the compensation they rightfully earned.

The Defendant: Tahona Bar Faces Labor Law Violation Allegations

Under California labor law, California employers like Tahona Bar have a legal duty to provide mandatory meal breaks for their employees. According to the lawsuit, Watson claims the company neglected its legal duty. Still, the employer contends that any lapses were not part of a systemic issue, but accidental and isolated incidents.

The Case: Veronica Watson v. Tahona Bar

The lawsuit claims that due to understaffing and excessively demanding work schedules, Tahona Bar routinely denied employees the opportunity to take legally required meal breaks, resulting in significant unpaid wages and violations of California wage and hour regulations.

What To Do If You Aren't Receiving Your Legally Required Meal Breaks?

If you think your employer is not complying with meal breaks mandated by labor law, record your work hours and any missed breaks. Review your pay stubs, check for discrepancies, and promptly report any you discover to your company's human resources department. If reporting the inconsistencies does not result in a resolution, consider contacting an experienced employment law attorney to discuss filing a complaint.

If you have questions about filing a wage and hour lawsuit, contact Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced and knowledgeable employment law attorneys are ready to assist you at one of their various law firm offices in Riverside, San Francisco, Sacramento, San Diego, Los Angeles, and Chicago.