Hilbers Class Action: Alleged Wage and Hour Allegations
/
In recent news, Hilbers faces wage and hour violation allegations in a California class action.
Case: Martin Couch v. Hilbers, Inc.
Court: Los Angeles County Superior Court of the State of California
Case No.: 25STCV34742
Get to Know the Plaintiff: Couch v. Hilbers
The plaintiff in the case, Martin Couch, is an individual who alleges he worked for the Hilbers entities as a non-exempt, hourly employee in California from January 2024 through May 2025. He filed a class action complaint on behalf of himself and other similarly situated current and former non-exempt employees, claiming the defendants engaged in uniform wage-and-hour practices that, among other things, failed to pay employees for all time worked (including alleged off-the-clock work) and failed to provide legally compliant meal and rest periods (and related premium pay), along with other associated Labor Code violations tied to pay practices and recordkeeping.
Who is the Defendant in the Case?
The defendant in the case, Hilbers, employed the plaintiff at a California operation. The plaintiff claims Hilbers engaged in wage-and-hour violations tied to its standard pay practices for non-exempt employees. The allegations would constitute violations of California Labor Code Sections §§ 201, 202, 203, 204, 210, 226.7, 510, 512, 558, 1194, 1197, 1197.1, 1198, 1198.5, and 2802.
The Plaintiffs Allege the Defendants Violated Multiple Labor Laws
According to the class action, the plaintiff alleged that Hilbers engaged in various business practices that violated labor law, including:
Failing to pay employees for all the time they worked, including time worked “off the clock.”
Expecting employees to complete pre-shift and post-shift work (like attending meetings) that wasn’t fully recorded or paid
Failing to provide meal breaks, cutting breaks short, or requiring employees to work while clocked out during what was supposed to be an off-duty meal period.
Failing to pay the additional “premium” hour of pay owed for missed meal breaks
Underpaying overtime/double time (and other pay tied to the “regular rate”) because incentive/bonus pay wasn’t properly included when calculating the pay rates
Failing to provide compliant paystubs/wage statements
Failing to reimburse required business expenses (like personal cell phone services used for work)
Failing to provide reporting-time pay when workers are required to report to work without being provided enough work
The Main Question of the Case: Couch v. Hilbers
The core question is whether the Hilbers entities had company-wide pay and scheduling practices that caused non-exempt employees to perform compensable work without full pay, including alleged off-the-clock work before/after shifts and during meal periods. The court will also need to evaluate whether employees were provided legally compliant meal and rest breaks, or instead were kept on duty/on call, interrupted, or required to work through breaks without receiving the required premium pay. A related issue is whether the employer correctly calculated and paid overtime and other wages tied to the “regular rate,” including whether incentive/bonus compensation was properly included. Finally, the case raises whether any alleged timekeeping and pay practice problems also resulted in non-compliant wage statements and unreimbursed business expenses across the proposed class.
As of January 2026, the case is pending in the Los Angeles County Superior Court of the State of California.
FAQ: Couch v. Hilbers
Q: What counts as “hours worked” in California?
A: “Hours worked” generally includes any time an employee is under the employer’s control or is allowed to work, including pre-shift/post-shift tasks.
Q: If an employee attends meetings or completes tasks off the clock, what wage rights may be triggered?
A: If that work is required or allowed, it should be paid and may also count toward overtime depending on the total hours worked in the day or week.
Q: What makes a meal break “off-duty?”
A: To qualify as “off duty,” an employee must be fully relieved of all work, and if the employee is required to work, the time may be compensable and can trigger premium pay penalties.
Q: How many rest breaks are required based on shift length, and what happens if staffing/workload prevents breaks?
A: Rest break entitlements generally increase with shift length, and heavy workload or staffing issues do not excuse missed breaks; when breaks are missed, premium pay may be owed to the employee.
Q: What is “premium pay” for missed meal/rest breaks, and when is an additional hour of pay owed?
A: Premium pay is one additional hour of pay at the employee’s regular rate owed when an employer fails to provide a compliant meal or rest break.
Q: How does bonus or incentive pay affect the “regular rate” used for overtime and other wage calculations?
A: Certain nondiscretionary bonuses and incentives must be included in the regular rate, which can increase the overtime rate and total wages owed.
If you believe your employer’s standard wage payment practices or overtime pay rate calculations may result in labor law violations, the employment law attorneys at Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik De Blouw LLP can help. Contact one of our offices in Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Riverside, or Chicago today to learn how to hold your employer accountable.
