Vision Payroll

An employee required to launder his work aprons by Starbucks Corporation (“Starbucks”) was not entitled to compensation under California law (Douglas O’Connor v. Starbucks Corporation, ND Cal, C 06-3706 VRW, July 14, 2008). Under an explanation of the relevant regulations by the California Industrial Wage Commission, “[e]mployers must maintain or provide a maintenance allowance for uniforms requiring ironing or dry cleaning or uniforms requiring special laundering for heavy soil.” In granting summary judgment, the court ruled that “Starbucks owes plaintiff a duty to pay such compensation only if the aprons require laundering separate from plaintiff’s regular laundry.” Since O’Connor, a former Starbucks barista, was unable to establish that the aprons required either dry cleaning or laundering separate from other articles as he had maintained, Starbucks owed no duty to compensate him.