Help wanted: When travel time counts as work time

DEAR CARRIE: A friend recently got a job with a small plumbing company. He drives 40 minutes to work to pick up the company truck. Then he has to drive 40 minutes to return the truck and pick up his car. The company doesn't pay him for the trip back because they say the job is over. Is that legal or is he supposed to be paid for his time until he gets home? --Travel pay

DEAR TRAVEL: It depends. He should certainly be paid for the time to take the truck back to the office, according to the U.S. Labor Department. In fact, he should be paid for time he travels to the first job site as well, since he has to stop by the home office first.

"If they had to report to the establishment first before going to the job site, travel from the employer's establishment to the job site would always be covered," said Irv Miljoner, the agency's district director for Long Island.

Then he should be paid for the time to return the truck. Both of those are examples of "compensable time," or time that should be paid, Miljoner said. Violations of those regulations are common, he said.

"It is a fairly common problem of people not getting paid for time involved in taking a vehicle to a job site and returning it at the end of the day," Miljoner said. When companies are looking for ways to cut cost, "travel time is an area where they sometimes do that," he said.

Of course every rule has its exceptions. If, for example, the company allowed your friend to drive the truck home, the company may not have to pay for that time.

"Then that would be home-to-work travel that wouldn't be compensable," Miljoner said.

But even that rule has a wrinkle of its own.

If the worker's last job site was "substantially farther" from his home than the office, then, company vehicle or not, the employer would have to pay your friend for the difference between the longer commuting time home and his normal commuting time, Miljoner said.

DEAR CARRIE: My company has new owners who informed me after I returned from my second week of vacation that I wouldn't be paid for it. Under the previous owner, my wage package had included two weeks of paid vacation time.

But the new owners maintain that the second week was a deal I had with the former owner only. I was not informed of the vacation change until after a year and a half into the new ownership.

I quit because of the effective reduction of wages and applied for unemployment insurance. Do you think I have a good case?
-- PTO Spat

DEAR PTO: Whether the new employer owes you for your second week of vacation depends on the company's actions and the purchase terms.

"If the new owners continued to operate under the policy of the former owners, they may very well be liable for the denied time, even if it was accrued under the prior owners," said a spokeswoman for the New York State Labor Department.

The new owner could also be liable for the previous benefits if its purchase agreement carried that stipulation.

"If the new company established its own policy for benefits, it would only be liable for previously accrued benefits if the sales agreement included the obligation for the former owner's liabilities," the spokeswoman said.

Your next move in sorting this out might be to contact the department. "The individual would need to file a complaint, and we would investigate the situation," the spokeswoman said.

Regarding the unemployment insurance claim, because you quit you might not be eligible for unemployment benefits.

"It would have to be proven that the quitting was for good cause," the spokeswoman said.