Brinker Could Clarify Further the Meaning of "Providing" a Meal Period
Court Rules That County Can Force Use of Sheriffs' Accrued Vacation Time

Flight Attendants Wage Claims Governed by Railway Labor Act

A flight attendant's claims under California labor law regarding minimum wages, overtime and meal/rest breaks are preempted by the Railway Labor Act (45 U.S.C. § 151 et seq.), according to an opinion published this week by the Second District Court of Appeal in Fitz-Gerald v. SkyWest Airlines, Inc. Accordingly, a summary judgment in favor of SkyWest on the employee's class action for such wage claims was upheld.

The case arose, at least in part, from a practice under which flight attendants are paid a per diem to cover all work performed other than "gate-to-gate" flight time. This "block time pay" averages $1.60 per hour, but only reduces the flight attendants' overall compensation rate to $23.13 an hour (flight time plus block time, averaged over a month). The employees, citing Armenta v. Osmose, Inc. (2005) 135 Cal.App.4th 314, contended that that wage averaging under the FLSA could not trump state minimum wage law. However, the court distinguished Armenta on several grounds: it did not involve an interstate air carrier, it not involve the RLA or a CBA sanctioned under the RLA, and it did not involve a state wage order that contained a RLA exemption.

The RLA regulates labor relations between common interstate air carriers and their employees. In United Air Lines, Inc. v. Industrial Welfare Com. (1963) 211 Cal.App.2d 729, the court held that a California IWC order requiring employers to pay for flight attendant uniforms did not apply to an interstate airline because the collective bargaining agreement provided that the cost of uniforms was to be paid in part by the employee. The court concluded that the IWC order was preempted by the RLA and that enforcement of the IWC order would burden interstate commerce.

Similarly, here, the court found that there was a CBA (even though SkyWest is a non-union employer), and that although the RLA contains no specific language with respect to state minimum wage law and meals/rest breaks, the RLA preempts all state law causes of action that depend upon interpretation of a CBA, including claims for state minimum wages, meal/break time damages and overtime wages. Because the first, second, and third causes of action were preempted by the RLA, the trial court properly ruled that the fourth cause of action for waiting time penalties (Labor Code § 203) and fifth cause of action for violation of the Unfair Business Practices Act were also barred.

Alternatively, the trial court ruled that the complaint was barred by the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978. The ADA provides that a state "may not enact or enforce a law, regulation or other provision having the force and effect of law related to a price, route, or service" of an air carrier. The United States Supreme Court has held that claims under a state unfair business practices statute are preempted by the Airline Deregulation Act because the state claims would impose economic regulation on airlines. Based on those federal cases, the court concluded that the ADA separately bars the fifth cause of action for relief under the California Unfair Business Practices Act.

You can download the opinion in Fitz-Gerald v. SkyWest Airlines, Inc. here in pdf or word format.

Comments

The comments to this entry are closed.