Henson

Henson v. C. Overaa & Company

Good Law
189 Cal. Rptr. 3d 115·2015 Cal. App. LEXIS 572·238 Cal. App. 4th 184·24 Wage & Hour Cas.2d (BNA) 1864
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 29, 2015A139966California5,441 words

Opinion

Opinion

Dondero, J.

INTRODUCTION

This appeal arises out of a dispute over the meaning of certain provisions of the “Prevailing Wage Law” and Shelley-Maloney Apprentice Labor Standards Act of 1939 (Shelley-Malony Act) relating to the employment of apprentices on public works projects. Floyd Henson, Gabriel Maestretti, and Leonard Minor (appellants) assert that C. Overaa & Company (respondent) violated the statutes by hiring construction craft laborer (laborer) apprentices instead of pipe fitter apprentices to work on the construction of certain water treatment plants. Appellants are pipe fitter apprentices, and they seek to represent a class of similarly situated individuals who lost wages and training as a result of respondent’s alleged violations. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of respondent on the ground the journeymen on the relevant projects were classified as laborers, and the Prevailing Wage Law merely required employers to hire apprentices who are in the same occupation as the journeymen on their projects. Appellants assert the trial court erred because the statutes require a contractor to select apprentices based not on their job title or union affiliation but the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.