Tolentino v. Gillig, LLC

Background

Ronald Tolentino sought allegedly unpaid minimum wages for time he worked before his “scheduled starting time.” The parties’ collective bargaining agreement defined work performed before the “regular starting time” as overtime paid at one and one-half times the straight-time hourly rate. The agreement also contained a grievance procedure covering disputes concerning its application or enforcement.

Gillig argued that Tolentino’s wage claim was actually a claim under section 301 of the federal labor law for overtime wages governed by the agreement. Tolentino argued that his regular starting time was different from his scheduled starting time because he regularly clocked in 10 minutes early.

Court’s Analysis

The court found Tolentino’s interpretation of the agreement weaker. It concluded that “regular starting time” referred to an employee’s scheduled starting time, because employees could not define their own regular starting times based on when they chose to arrive and clock in. The court therefore treated the claim for hours worked before that time as an overtime claim under the agreement.

The court determined that this dispute was covered by the agreement’s grievance procedure. Tolentino had not alleged that he exhausted that procedure or that he had been prevented from doing so. Based on that failure, the court concluded that the federal wage claim had to be dismissed.

Ruling

Judge Vince Chhabria granted Gillig’s motion for judgment on the pleadings on the federal claim. The court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction—federal authority to hear related state-law claims—over the remaining state-law claims. It directed the clerk to remand those claims to the Superior Court of California, County of Alameda, and to close the federal case. The opinion does not specify whether dismissal of the federal claim was with or without prejudice.