No specific laws identified for this ruling.
The appellate court affirmed the trial court's grant of summary judgment for defendants, rejecting plaintiffs' wage and hour claims under the North Carolina Wage and Hour Act and holding that van transportation and safety equipment deductions did not constitute compensable work time.
Leverette v. Labor Works International: Court Rules on Transportation Time and Equipment Costs
This case involved workers who sued their employer, Labor Works International, claiming they weren't properly paid under North Carolina's wage and hour laws. The workers argued they should have been compensated for time spent on van transportation to work sites and that deductions for safety equipment were improper.
The court ruled against the workers on both issues. The appeals court agreed with the lower court that transportation time in company vans did not count as work time that required payment. The court also upheld the employer's right to deduct costs for safety equipment from workers' paychecks.
What this means for workers: This ruling shows that not all time spent related to work is considered "work time" that must be paid. Transportation to job sites may not be compensable, and employers may be allowed to charge workers for certain equipment costs. However, wage and hour laws can be complex and vary by state and situation. Workers who believe they're not being paid properly should understand their specific rights under their state's laws, as different circumstances might lead to different outcomes.
This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.
Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 3 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.
This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.