California Labor Law Violations: Check in the mail, no company car

Bakersfield, CAKevin believes his former employer violated the California labor law on two separate issues: first, he was discriminated against because all managers, with the exception of Kevin, got a company car and second, he didn't receive a final check in a timely manner.

Kevin was a terminal manager in the milk hauling business. It was his job to oversee operations and whenever there was an accident or any other 'incident', he would be the first to arrive on the scene. In Kevin's case, he arrived in his own vehicle while the other four terminal managers drove company vehicles.

"When the company was recently bought, I sat down with the new owner and we discussed policies," says Kevin. "They asked if I had any questions and I asked when I would get assigned a company vehicle. They said terminal managers do not have company vehicles and I would be compensated by cpm (cents per mile). There was no difference between my job and the other terminal managers. In my area there are four people who have the same job description—they all drive the company car.

I let this go on for 18 months. One terminal manager in the office next to me had a company vehicle and he would take it home on weekends and even an assistant terminal manager had a company car. I questioned it with the company manager and basically got lip service.

Finally I resigned. 'I don't want to go into litigation but I do want an explanation as to why I wasn't given a company vehicle,' I said to HR. I can't even get an answer.

Here is the second issue: I resigned on July 29; I gave verbal notice to HR. By law you must receive your final pay check with overtime and vacation etc. within 72 hours. Right after I resigned the vice president called me and asked if we could talk about it. He scheduled a meeting for the following week and over the weekend I wrote a final exit letter—my formal resignation-- and e-mailed it to HR on August 5th. The e-mail also had my address and contact information. My check amount was to be in excess of $6500.

Two weeks later I phoned main HR in Iowa and told them I had not received my check. 'In all fairness you didn't go to a meeting on August 1 and they had another address in the data base and that is why you haven't received your check,' he said.
'Okay, that is fair about the meeting but on August 5th I gave you an exit letter with my address,' I replied. I should have received a check by August 8th at the latest.

I finally got my check by registered mail on August 21st. I believe that the reason it finally came was because I called main HR again on August 17th and they promised to ' make a few phone calls'. It was due to the urgency of my phone call that I finally got the check.

My feeling is that I should be compensated for nine days of pay because I did not receive my check in a timely manner, according to the California labor law. I didn't know anything about this law until a few years ago. If you fire an employee you must have their check in hand and if an employee resigns, the 72 hour rule applies. And if those rules are broken, the employer has to pay the consequences and reimburse that employee as if he was working, equal to his regular pay.

I kept the email I sent to HR with my address—it is perfectly clear that they had my address on August 5th.

And I would like either compensation or a reasonable explanation regarding why I didn't get the company car. The company doesn't have an answer so that is why I am pursuing this issue. I really believe I was discriminated against. It's a dog-eat-dog world out there--I gave the company an opportunity to give me a reasonable explanation but instead they ignored me so now I intend to take legal action.

Tomorrow I have a meeting with the California labor board about the check issue and the company car. I have no idea what to expect from this meeting but I will keep you posted."