Law360 reported that plaintiff Barry Burns worked as a print support service coordinator for a few months, and his duties involved uploading and handling clients’ documentation in binders. Plaintiff Samantha Zuzuarregui worked as an administrative assistant from June 2023 to October 2024 and her duties involved ordering and restocking supplies.
According to the complaint, plaintiffs accuse Moss Adams, one of the largest accounting and consulting firms in the U.S, and the staffing companies of violating California labor law by:
- Failing to compensate employees for all time worked. Plaintiffs and others worked more than eight hours per day, 40 hours per week, or seven straight workdays without receiving overtime.
- Manipulating time entries. Plaintiffs and others were required to work after clocking out and “detrimentally rounded, edited and/or manipulated time entries so the hours recorded were less than the hours actually worked.”
These claims often carry heightened risk for employers because they suggest intentional underpayment rather than mere technical violations, said one legal expert. The plaintiffs brought the case under California’s Private Attorneys General Act, which allows workers to seek civil penalties on behalf of themselves, other employees, and the state. Under PAGA, penalties can accumulate quickly, particularly where timekeeping or record-alteration claims are involved.
Staffing Company Arrangements
Employment lawyers note that complaints involving staffing firms often turn on whether the end client exercised sufficient control over workers’ schedules, duties, or time records to qualify as a joint employer. And this lawsuit highlights ongoing legal risks associated with staffing-company arrangements, particularly in California. Employers that rely on third-party agencies to supply workers are frequently named alongside staffing firms when disputes arise, especially where plaintiffs allege the client company controls hours, work assignments, or timekeeping systems.
Timekeeping disputes, in particular, have become a focal point for PAGA plaintiffs, as claims of altered or inaccurate records are often easier to explain to judges and juries than more technical wage calculations. Even relatively small unpaid wage amounts can translate into significant statutory penalties.
What Is PAGA?
California’s Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) allows employees to step into the shoes of the state and sue employers for labor-code violations.
READ MORE CALIFORNIA LABOR LAW LEGAL NEWS
Instead of seeking traditional damages alone, workers pursue civil penalties, which are split between the state and affected employees. Typically, 75% of penalties go to California, with 25% distributed to workers.
PAGA cases are especially potent because:
- They can cover large groups of employees without traditional class certification,
- Penalties can stack per employee, per pay period,
- Claims often survive even when arbitration agreements limit individual lawsuits.
The Burns lawsuit underscores the continuing impact of PAGA as a powerful enforcement mechanism. Companies operating in California face mounting pressure to audit timekeeping systems, clarify staffing relationships, and resolve disputes early to avoid costly litigation.
The case is Burns et al. v. Moss Adams LLP et al. Case #: 2:26-cv-00206
Source link
