California Supreme Court Agrees with AARP: Workers Must Have Access to Seating

By AARP Foundation Attorney Barbara Jones

This week the California Supreme Court issued two decisions benefitting employees. In Kilby v. CVS Pharmacy and Henderson v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, the Court held that California law requires employers to provide employees with suitable seats when the “nature of the work” allows it.  The Court noted that even if part of a worker’s job requires standing, e.g., stacking shelves, workers still must be provided seats when they can perform their job while seated.  The Court also noted that many standing jobs have “lulls in operation”, and that employees should be allowed to sit during those periods.

AARP Foundation Litigation attorneys filed a friend-of-the-court (amicus) brief on behalf of the workers, pointing out that older workers are the nation's fastest growing segment of the working population and that the number of workers 50+ is expected to increase to 57.9 million by 2022.  The brief also highlighted numerous studies, reports, and academic research that document the health problems associated with prolonged, uninterrupted standing. There is, indeed, a strong, scientific consensus that workstations should be set up to allow workers to both sit and stand.

The cases before the Court involved a customer service representative for CVS Pharmacy and bank tellers at JPMorgan Chase Bank.  The Court discussing California labor regulations noted that the history of California’s wage orders reflect a determination that ”humane consideration for the welfare of employees requires that they be allowed to sit at their work or between operations when it is feasible for them to do so.” The truth is it is difficult for employees of any age to stand all day. The Court discussed a variety of workers impacted, including teenage gift-wrappers, who will benefit from the decision.

Copies of the Court’s decision can be found here: http://bit.ly/1Vr4f4N.

A copy of AARP amicus brief filed by Foundation lawyers here: http://bit.ly/1RUF5cd