Matteo Brunozzi v. Cable Communications, Inc.
851 F.3d 990
| 9th Cir. | 2017Background
- Matteo Brunozzi and Casey McCormick were CCI cable technicians paid on a piece-rate basis who routinely worked over 40 hours and six-day weeks.
- CCI’s written pay plan computes a weekly Piece Rate Total, pays a Production Bonus (effectively 1/6 of Piece Rate Total in non-overtime weeks), and calculates overtime premiums by deriving an "average hourly" rate from Piece Rate Total (dividing by hours), halving that rate, and multiplying by overtime hours; the Production Bonus is reduced when overtime is worked.
- Technicians sued CCI claiming violations of the FLSA overtime rules and Oregon wage statutes (including ORS 652.140 — final pay on termination; ORS 659A.199 — whistleblower/retaliation; and ORS 652.355 — protection for discussing/bringing wage claims). Brunozzi asserted additional state-law retaliation claims.
- The district court granted summary judgment for CCI on the technicians’ FLSA and state-law claims. Both technicians appealed.
- The Ninth Circuit reviewed de novo and found material legal issues about whether CCI’s compensation scheme improperly reduces the regular rate when overtime is worked and whether certain internal complaints are protected under Oregon law.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether CCI’s pay plan properly computes the FLSA "regular rate" for pieceworkers (overtime calculation) | CCI’s Production Bonus is part of normal weekly earnings; its reduction when overtime is worked lowers the regular rate and unlawfully reduces overtime pay | CCI says it pays required piece-rate wages and half-time overtime premium per 29 C.F.R. § 778.111 and that bonus treatment is permissible | Court: CCI’s scheme miscalculates the regular rate by diminishing a regular-production bonus in overtime weeks; plan violates FLSA — reversal of summary judgment for CCI |
| Whether violation of FLSA affects ORS 652.140 (final wages on termination) claim | Technicians: FLSA violation supports remand and affects wage-pay obligations under ORS 652.140 | CCI: no FLSA violation, so state claim fails | Court: Because the FLSA claim was validly decided for plaintiffs, district court’s judgment for CCI on ORS 652.140 is reversed and remanded |
| Whether "reported" in ORS 659A.199 (whistleblower protection) requires reporting to external authorities | Brunozzi: verbal/internal reports to supervisors are protected "reports" under the statute | CCI/district court: "reported" means to external authorities only | Court: Interpreting text, context, and legislative history, "reported" covers internal and external reports; Brunozzi’s internal complaints are protected — reversal |
| Whether complaints about unpaid overtime or refusal to work without overtime pay constitute protected "wage claim" activity under ORS 652.355 | Brunozzi: his complaints and refusal to work overtime unless paid constituted making/discussing a wage claim and are protected | CCI/district court: Oregon precedent limits ORS 652.355 protection; mere complaints may not be "wage claims" | Court: A demand for future pay (refusal to work unless paid) is not a past-due wage claim, but Brunozzi’s complaints/inquiries about unpaid overtime qualify as discussions/inquiries about a past-due wage claim and are protected — reversal |
Key Cases Cited
- Walling v. Youngerman-Reynolds Hardwood Co., 325 U.S. 419 (Sup. Ct.) (defines "regular rate" as the hourly rate actually paid for the normal non-overtime workweek)
- Walling v. Alaska Pac. Consol. Min. Co., 152 F.2d 812 (9th Cir.) (payments forming part of normal weekly income must be included in the regular rate)
- Bay Ridge Operating Co. v. Aaron, 334 U.S. 446 (Sup. Ct.) (regular rate cannot be left to contract nomenclature; look to actual compensation)
- Parth v. Pomona Valley Hosp. Med. Ctr., 630 F.3d 794 (9th Cir.) (discussion of regular rate principles)
- Christopher v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 132 S. Ct. 2156 (Sup. Ct.) (context on the FLSA’s purpose to protect against substandard wages and oppressive hours)