Serrano v. Aerotek, Inc., 21 Cal. App. 5th 773 (2018)

Norma Serrano brought this putative class action against her employer (Aerotek), which placed her as a temporary employee with its client (Bay Bread). Serrano alleged violations of the Labor Code and of the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) based upon, among other things, Aerotek’s alleged failure to provide required meal periods. The trial court granted summary judgment to Aerotek based upon the undisputed facts that the temporary services contract required Bay Bread to comply with all applicable laws; Aerotek provided its meal period policy to temporary employees such as Serrano and trained them on it during their orientation; and the policy required employees to notify Aerotek if they believed they were being prevented from taking meal breaks. The Court of Appeal affirmed dismissal of the claims after concluding that “Serrano fails to convince us that anything more is required of staffing agencies when they provide temporary employees to other companies.” The Court further held that Aerotek was not vicariously liable for any meal period violations committed by Bay Bread. See also Castillo v. Glenair, Inc., 2018 WL 1790683 (Cal. Ct. App. 2018) (employees who settled class action claims against staffing company may not assert same claims against company where they had been placed to work).