In a recent California Court of Appeal case, there has been a resounding revelation that public employers might carry a certain degree of responsibility with regard to at-home working expenses of their employees.
The case, Krug v. Board of Trustees of the California State University, serves as a pertinent example for public employers, clearly implying that they could be held accountable for workers’ necessary expenditures when working from home.
Interestingly, the Labor Code Section 2802 does not overtly or subtly suggest that it relates to government agencies. Nonetheless, the court’s interpretation and application of the law have signaled otherwise, thrusting public employers into the spotlight. The possibility of being held liable for remote work expenses might now be a new reality that public employers need to come to terms with and prepare for in their future operations.
While more exploration and interpretation of this legal scope are warranted, it is evident from the case that public employers, similar to their private counterparts, may also be required to maintain an environment conducive to effective work, even when it necessitates covering some costs incurred by employees in the course of their work-from-home sessions.
This interpretation of the law emphasizes a shift toward recognizing the evolving nature of work and the consequent expenses employees bear. Recognizing these costs might have implications for the budget and overall financial planning of public sector organizations. It, therefore, becomes imperatively necessary for public employers to stay ahead of the curve by understanding the undercurrents of such legal implications and strategize accordingly.