Filed: May 02, 2019
Latest Update: May 02, 2019
Summary: THIRD INTERIM ORDER RE DISCOVERY DISPUTE RE PAGA-RELATED DISCOVERY Re: Dkt. Nos. 59, 68 VIRGINIA K. DEMARCHI , Magistrate Judge . The Court's second interim order required the parties to discuss a procedure for assessing whether the termination and final wage payment data in MarketSource's records for a given terminated employee requires further investigation to determine whether a violation of California Labor Code 201 exists. See Dkt. No. 67. The parties' supplemental submission in r
Summary: THIRD INTERIM ORDER RE DISCOVERY DISPUTE RE PAGA-RELATED DISCOVERY Re: Dkt. Nos. 59, 68 VIRGINIA K. DEMARCHI , Magistrate Judge . The Court's second interim order required the parties to discuss a procedure for assessing whether the termination and final wage payment data in MarketSource's records for a given terminated employee requires further investigation to determine whether a violation of California Labor Code 201 exists. See Dkt. No. 67. The parties' supplemental submission in re..
More
THIRD INTERIM ORDER RE DISCOVERY DISPUTE RE PAGA-RELATED DISCOVERY
Re: Dkt. Nos. 59, 68
VIRGINIA K. DEMARCHI, Magistrate Judge.
The Court's second interim order required the parties to discuss a procedure for assessing whether the termination and final wage payment data in MarketSource's records for a given terminated employee requires further investigation to determine whether a violation of California Labor Code § 201 exists. See Dkt. No. 67. The parties' supplemental submission in response to that order reflects a disagreement in the first instance about what MarketSource's records show. Mr. Delgado says: "Defendant's payroll register contains earning codes that correlate to the purpose of a payment—i.e. wages, bonuses, expense reimbursement." Dkt. No. 68 at 2. MarketSource does not say that its payroll register contains no such codes, but it insists that determining when final wages have been paid "requires a manual inquiry" because "[t]he last payment to an individual might not have been a wage payment." Id. at 7. Nevertheless, MarketSource appears to have consulted its payroll register with respect to terminated employees DH, SB, and KH to reach a conclusion that none of those employees received final wage payments after their dates of termination. Id. at 4-5.
The Court requires a clear answer to the question of what information MarketSource's PeopleSoft system and payroll register does and does not show. For this purpose, the Court is not interested in whether that data may include inaccuracies due to data entry error or otherwise. Accordingly, MarketSource shall provide a declaration of a knowledgeable corporate representative that answers the following questions:
1. Does MarketSource's PeopleSoft system include entries for terminated employees' date of termination?
2. Does MarketSource's payroll register include entries reflecting the date final wages were paid to terminated employees?
3. Does MarketSource's payroll register use codes or other indicators reflecting the purpose of a payment as "wages" distinct from other forms of payment, such as bonuses or expense reimbursements?
4. Can MarketSource query its payroll register to identify the last date on which the payroll register reflects a payment of "wages" was made, and if not, why not?
MarketSource must submit this declaration by 4:00pm on May 3, 2019.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
