Mandatory Paid Sick Leave: The New San Francisco Treat
UPS to Pay $87 Million to Settle Wage and Hour Class Action

New Travel Expense Regs

Tomorrow, the California Division of Labor Standards Enforcement will conduct hearings into new proposed regulations governing travel expense reimbursements. The regulations pertain to travel and automobile expenses, and reimbursements for meals and other expenses. They would authorize the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement ( DLSE) to take expense reimbursement claims, and for employees to recover attorney's fees on such claims.

The regulations appear to be a response to the holding in Gattuso v. Harte-Hanks Shoppers, Inc., a 2005 appellate case, currently under review by the Supreme Court (fully briefed and awaiting a hearing date), which permitted employers to purport that higher pay for an employee could be deemed to be inclusive of expenses, and pay such a rate in lieu of providing travel reimbursements..

The proposed regulations would prohibit the kind of arrangement authorized by the Court of Appeal in Gattuso. The proposed regulations further provide that employers will pay the IRS mileage allowance, currently set at 48.5 cents per mile. Travel expenses would be calculated under any of three standards: (i) payment of actual expenses; (ii) payment under the IRS standard meal and incidental expense allowance under Publication 1542; or (iii) a per diem at the IRS-set rate. To use the per diem method, an employer must notify the employee in advance. The proposed regulations also add to the employer's pay stub documentation, which would begin to require an (i) itemized statement in writing, (ii) explaining the computation of the mileage reimbursement, (iii) including the beginning and end of the time period for which the mileage reimbursement check is being issued, (iv) the rate of reimbursement used, and (v) the number of miles being reimbursed.

The DLSE has scheduled only this one public hearing on these proposed regulations. The hearing will be in San Francisco, as follows:

Date:  February 7, 2007
Time:  10:00 a.m.
Place:  Hiram Johnson State Building, Auditorium
455 Golden Gate Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94102

Public comment will begin promptly at 10:00 a.m. and will conclude at 12 noon or when the last speaker has finished his or her presentation, whichever occurs last. At the hearing, any person may present statements or arguments, orally or in writing, relevant to the proposed action. DLSE requests, but does not require, that persons who make oral comments at the hearing also submit a written copy of their testimony at the hearing.

The written comment period also ends tomorrow. Any interested person, or authorized representative, may submit written comments to DLSE relevant to the proposed regulatory action. The written comment period closes at 5:00 p.m. on February 7, 2007. All comments must be submitted in writing (by mail, fax, or email) and received by that time by DLSE's Regulation Coordinator. Submit comments to:

Susie Smith, Regulation Coordinator
Division of Labor Standards Enforcement
Department of Industrial Relations
801 "K" Street, Suite 2100
Sacramento, CA 95814
Email: [email protected]
Fax: (916) 322-1267

Comments

kent

what's the source of an employer's obligation to buy food for traveling employees?

the proposed reg's "per diem" requirement says employers must pay for meals for business travelers. since "eating" is primarily for the employee's benefit (and would be accomplished regardless of the travel), why should the employer buy the food?

is the "per diem" only supposed to cover the "added" cost of food for the traveler (i.e., it assumes on-the-road eating is more expensive than at-home)? i don't think so.

so, is there any authority for requiring an employer to buy food for a traveling employee?

Michael P in San Diego

Business travel sucks. You work long hours, you don't exercise, you eat what you can when you can, which usually means fast food. I'm not in my home town so I can't see the people I want to see, attend events, classes, etc. I'm the property of my employer, not just from 8am to 5pm, but from Monday to Friday when I arrive home. My life during that week is out of my control. Therefore, the employer should pay to sustain me through this unnaturally long period which means my bed, my meals and maybe even my laundry. Much the same as those that serve overnight shifts in the military, firehouses, oil rigs, etc.

The comments to this entry are closed.