The lawsuit, Robbins v. Phillips 66 Company, accused the American multinational energy company of violating California’s wage and hour laws by not providing meal breaks to employees and failing to compensate workers for time spent putting on and taking off personal protective equipment (PPE) while off-the-clock. The payout works out to roughly $7,140 per worker, but that’s a drop in the bucket for Phillips 66, which is worth $48.21 billion as of August 2025. The settlement joins a long list of the company’s dealings with labor issues and labor relations.
According to Law360, the court found that the settlement is the result of arms-length negotiations between the parties and two mediations had adequately investigated plaintiffs’ claims, certified two classes, and become familiar with their strengths and weaknesses… “The settlement of plaintiffs’ representative claims under the PAGA is fair and reasonable and is approved.”
Robbins v. Phillips 66 Company
Plaintiff Robbins first filed a proposed class action in November 2017. Robbins v. Phillips 66 Company challenged the company’s clock rounding policies, a common issue in industrial workplaces where employees must spend time before and after their shifts “donning and doffing” safety equipment, which is compensated time under California labor law. And the lawsuit also claimed that employees were automatically deducted 30-minute meal breaks from their pay, even when those breaks were interrupted, shortened, or not taken at all. California law requires employers to record the start and end times of meal breaks, but Phillips argued that it is not required. The plaintiffs cited a court decision that contradicted Phillips, and they argued that time-clock rounding policies and not providing meal breaks resulted in underpayment of wages.
Violate Labor Laws, Pay Fine, Repeat.
READ MORE CALIFORNIA LABOR LAW LEGAL NEWS
The $12.5 million settlement sounds like a lot until you take into consideration Phillips 66’s market value (based on multiple sources showing market caps in the $48-51 billion range). A $12.5 million payout likely saved the company more than not paying proper wages and breaks over the years. Given this lawsuit involved almost 1,800 workers working in two major refineries over what was likely an extended period, it would be logical to conclude that violating labor laws is a systematic practice for the company.
- In 2024, the United Steelworkers filed grievances after 21 union workers were fired from the Billings refinery, with workers ranging from 2 to 37 years of service.
- When Phillips 66 closed the Alliance refinery after Hurricane Ida, union workers were offered a maximum of 16 weeks severance pay, while non-union salaried workers got up to 60 weeks – which workers called “insulting” as it shortchanges union workers when it can.
- There are multiple National Labor Relations Board cases involving Phillips 66 facilities, suggesting recurring disputes over labor practices and how the company is testing legal boundaries.
- Phillips 66 has admitted no wrongdoing in this settlement (which typically don’t require companies to admit fault), so there’s no real deterrent beyond the financial cost
- The settlement does not require systemic changes to prevent future violations. So, unless there are court-ordered compliance measures or significantly higher penalties, they’ll likely view this as just a cost of doing business.
And herein lies the fundamental problem: Companies like Phillips 66 have little incentive to keep from breaking labor laws because the penalties are usually much less than what companies save with corporate wage theft. Exploitation becomes economically rational. The only deterrent would be a penalty large enough to cog their wheels rather than a $12.5 million drop in their bucket, and criminal charges slapped on executives. Unfortunately, neither happened here.
Source link
