Miles v. Kirkland’s Stores, 2024 WL 74698 (9th Cir. 2024)

Ariana Miles was employed by Kirkland’s, a chain of home décor stores, from February 2011 to July 2018. She sued her former employer under two theories. First, she alleged that the company unlawfully required its employees to remain in the store during their rest breaks. She also alleged that employees were forced to work off-the-clock, because company policy stated that employees who brought bags to work would be subject to visual inspections when they left, but these inspections would take place at the store entrance, after they clocked out. Miles filed a motion to certify classes based on both of these theories, but the district court denied the motion after concluding that individual issues would predominate over common issues for both proposed classes.

In this appeal, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the denial of certification for the “bag check” class, but reversed and remanded the denial of the certification of the rest break class. As to that claim, the company’s policy explicitly required employees to remain on the premises during their rest breaks, unless they had their supervisors’ permission to leave. While the company submitted declarations from employees to prove that the store did not in fact require its employees to get their managers’ permission, the panel held that these declarations only discussed store conditions in 2021, which was after the relevant time period. On the other hand, the declarations submitted by the plaintiff, alongside the company policy, provided “overwhelming evidence” that the company consistently enforced its policy for all employees during the relevant period.