Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Work and Employment
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 07-20-2020, 05:28 PM
 
62 posts, read 43,286 times
Reputation: 13

Advertisements

My previous employer did not reimburse me for my pre-employment background check, pre-employment physical exam, pre-employment First Aid/CPR. I was a social worker, and California requires all social workers to take and pass all those pre-employment requirements. As well as waiting time penalties.

CA Labor law specifically says the employer must pay or reimburse for these costs if they are required by regulation or law, which they are (Labor Code Sections 450-452, 2802, 222.5). At the settlement conference, my previous employer refused to pay or settle.

What possible defense at the Wage Claim Hearing would my employer have for not reimbursing me when the labor law says they have to? Thanks
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-20-2020, 07:19 PM
 
13,131 posts, read 21,016,446 times
Reputation: 21411
Quote:
Originally Posted by girlygirls32 View Post
What possible defense at the Wage Claim Hearing would my employer have for not reimbursing me when the labor law says they have to? Thanks
Because their interpretation of the laws differs from your interpretation of the laws. Even the CA Labor Code sections you cite, have had mixed outcome when cases have advanced to state courts. But, the employer can't take this to a state court and argue based on case law until the responsible regulatory body makes a ruling that they disagree with.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-21-2020, 09:06 AM
 
62 posts, read 43,286 times
Reputation: 13
the labor code makes it pretty clear, at least to me, the employer must reimburse or pay. thank you for your reply

Last edited by girlygirls32; 07-21-2020 at 09:56 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-21-2020, 01:12 PM
 
13,131 posts, read 21,016,446 times
Reputation: 21411
But that's the whole issue, the Labor Code isn't always what it appears or applies equally across the broad. Example, State Courts have been ruling that if the "State" mandates a license, training, certification, clearance, etc as a condition of employment, the employee is responsible for those cost to meet the State's requirement. But if the employer imposes any requirement that was not mandated prior to hiring by the State's, the cost is on the employer. Further complicating this is that it;s a mixed bag when it comes to conditional employment. Contingencies can muddle the interpretation and have gone both ways. That is why many employers will refuse any advance negotiating and take it to a formal hearing so an actual AL determination is made based on merits of all point.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-21-2020, 03:02 PM
 
62 posts, read 43,286 times
Reputation: 13
i see... what do you think about this?

LABOR CODE - LAB 222.5.

No person shall withhold or deduct from the compensation of any employee, or require any prospective employee or applicant for employment to pay, any fee for, or cost of, any pre-employment medical or physical examination taken as a condition of employment, nor shall any person withhold or deduct from the compensation of any employee, or require any employee to pay any fee for, or costs of, medical or physical examinations required by any law or regulation of federal, state or local governments or agencies thereof.

For example: CA regulation states all social workers must pass a physical exam prior to working on site at a foster care agency. After my job interview, I receive a offer of employment, and I say yes. The employer then gives me a form to take to a doctor of my choice to complete. I pay out of pocket. The employer must reimburse, from how I am reading the labor code.

I just do not see how the hearing officer could side with the employer in this case. And if they do side with me, the employee, you are saying the employer can appeal and take it to state.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-21-2020, 05:47 PM
 
13,131 posts, read 21,016,446 times
Reputation: 21411
It should be fairly cut and dry, but that doesn't mean they won't try and fight it at with the Labor Commission. Odds are they will be ordered to pay. If they keep appealing they could drag it out for many more months. Ultimately, if they lose with the regulatory agency, their only option is to sue the Commission in state court.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Work and Employment

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:26 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top