Wage Law

An Orange County Superior Court ruling declaring invalid a wage order promulgated by the California Industrial Welfare Commission (IWC) has been reversed by the Fourth District Court of Appeal. In Small v. Superior Court, the trial court ruled that IWC Wage Order No. 16-2001 (wages, hours and working conditions for employees in the on-site construction industry and other occupations) was not accompanied by a sufficient statement of the basis, was not properly published, and contained an unworkable definition of “given craft,” which made the order "unreasonable, arbitrary, capricious and unfair."

The Court of Appeal found this determination to be an abuse of discretion where the Wage Order was recommended by the statutorily required two-thirds majority of wage board made up of labor and management representatives and was not found by IWC to be unsupported by substantial evidence. Upon a writ petition by the employees, supported by the IWC, the trial court has been ordered to issue a new and different order ruling (1) the statement as to the basis for Wage Order 16 is valid with regard to the items challenged; (2) whether Wage Order 16 was properly published was not within the scope of the preliminary legal issue submitted by stipulation to the court to determine, and in any event there is a presumption the IWC complied with its official duty to publish the order in the specified cities; and (3) Wage Order 16 was not unreasonable, arbitrary, capricious or unfair with respect to the definitions of “work unit” and “given craft.”

At issue is the validity of an alternative work schedule imposed by Brinderson Constructors, Inc., the defendant contractor. You can download the full text of Small here in pdf or Word format.