California Employment Lawyers Blog

A former Los Angeles, California car wash employee reportedly won an $80,000 wage and hour lawsuit recently, according to the Los Angeles Times, after the worker accused the company of failing to pay him for hours that he was forced to work prior to clocking in to his actual job.

In a related California Employment Lawyers blog post, our attorneys discussed the prevalence of worker exploitation in Southern California car washes. In October of last year, California Governor Jerry Brown (then Attorney General) filed a $6.6 million lawsuit against the owners of eight car washes in Southern California, after a five-month investigation found that employees were regularly denied minimum wage and overtime compensation, rest and meal breaks, and were forced to falsify their records, along with being forced to show up to work and only receive compensation when business picked up.

In the Los Angeles wage and hour lawsuit, Tomas Rodriquez reportedly filed a lawsuit last October against Handy J Carwash, claiming that he and his co-workers had their hours cut after the owners brought in other employees who worked for tips only. Rodriguez, who is from Hidalgo, Mexico, claimed that after asking for proper compensation, the owners intimidated workers with threats of job loss and calling immigration officials. The other eight workers who were involved in the suit reportedly dropped out due to alleged intimidation.

In 2008, a Los Angeles Times investigation found that two-thirds of Southern California carwashes were out of compliance with one or more state labor laws between 2003 and 2008--the worst record in the state's low wage industries, according to state regulators. The carwash owners were found to often violate immigration laws and labor laws by hiring illegal immigrants and minors and paying them far below the minimum wage, failing to give them workman's compensation insurance and meal breaks, and sometimes forcing them to work for only tips.

Continue reading "Former Car Wash Worker Awarded $80K Over Wage and Hour Violations" »

In recent wage and hour news that our Riverside employment attorneys have been following, a well-known sandwich shop in New York City has agreed to pay over $5 million in back wages for minimum wage and overtime violations--the largest settlement in the New York State Department of Labor's 110 year history.

According to the state's Labor Department, between 2002 and 2008, Lenny's sandwich chain robbed over 800 low-wage workers at 11 city locations out of millions of dollars, forcing some employees to work grueling 12-hour shifts every day of the week, for a weekly wage of $275--which according to state wage and hour laws should have at least been $500.

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo claimed that this multimillion dollar settlement sends a strong message to New York employers that employee exploitation will not be tolerated and that the Labor Department will continue to work hard to protect the rights of New York employees, to ensure that they receive every dollar that they deserve.

Under the terms of the wage and hour settlement, the employees will reportedly receive monetary payouts based on the number of hours that they worked. The Labor Department has received $1 million in a down payment from the sandwich shop, and the remaining $4 million will be paid out over the next two years, with another $100,000 to be paid in penalties.

Continue reading "Sandwich Shop Hit for Over $5 Million in Wage and Hour Lawsuit Settlement" »

According to a recent U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) press release that our Carson, California employment lawyers have been following, 67 employees of the Massachusetts-based contractor CAL Construction Co. Inc., will receive $1.3 million in unpaid back wages and fringe benefits after not being paid prevailing wage rates while working on a New York low-income housing project that was partially funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.

The DOL's Wage and Hour Division reportedly investigated owner Cesar A. Lemus and CAL Construction, finding them responsible for willfully violating the Davis-Bacon and Related Acts (DBRA) by underpaying the employees who performed many different trades, including building labor work, carpentry, and painting on an apartment rehab project from 2009 to 2010.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act reportedly incorporates employment provisions from the DBRA that require companies to pay prevailing wages and benefits to laborers employed on projects that receive federal funding. The investigation uncovered that CAL Construction paid some workers only a portion of the prevailing pay and fringe benefits that were owed to them and that CAL Construction compensated workers both off and on the books. The company also reportedly neglected to pay nonunion workers the necessary fringe benefits, as well as benefits to local trade union members supplying other workers on the project.

Cal Construction was also accused of violating the provision of the Copeland Act by falsifying payrolls for government submission, and violating the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act (CWHSSA) by failing to compensate workers time and one-half the regular rate of pay for all hours worked beyond 40 in a workweek. The company also demanded that some workers pay back some of their wages every week, and convinced other employees not to cooperate with the DOL during the wage and hour investigation.

Continue reading "Federal Contractor to Pay $1.3 in Back Wages and Fringe Benefits" »

An appeals court in Pennsylvania has reportedly upheld a $187.6 million verdict in a class action wage and hour lawsuit, that our Riverside employment attorneys have been watching, stating that Wal-Mart violated wage and hour laws, by pressuring store managers to skip their required meal and rest breaks.

According to Reuters, the class action lawsuit reportedly represents around 187,000 former and current Wal-Mart employees who worked for the retail chain between 1998 and 2006 in Pennsylvania stores.

The employees claimed in the case that Wal-Mart engaged in improper business practices by pressuring store managers to build productivity, strengthen profit and cut costs with the lure of significant bonuses based on store profitability--leading to constant understaffing, poor scheduling, and chronic rest-break violations.

The case was brought by Dolores Hummel and Michelle Braun, two employees working for stores in the eastern Pennsylvania-area who reportedly drew on evidence from around 46 million shifts.

Continue reading "Appeals Court Upholds $187.6M Verdict in Class Action Wage and Hour Lawsuit" »

As our attorneys recently discussed in a Westminster, California employment lawyers blog, a flurry of California retail chains such as Home Depot, Wal-Mart and Target are being sued for failing to provide suitable seating for employees who are expected to work in positions that keep them on their feet throughout the day.

According to a related Associated Press article, two recent appellate decisions that allow employees to use California's Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) provision are leaving retail employers to face millions of dollars in monetary damages.

As our Riverside employment lawyers discussed, early suitable seating lawsuits were based on an Industrial Welfare Commission (IWC) Wage Order containing provisions regulating working hours, minimum wage and other standard issues of employment, including suitable seating. The first two important appellate decisions that turned "suitable seating" into law were issued in November, with many new cases following thereafter.

In the Home Depot case, the retail store's lawyers argued that the provision wasn't a law because the passage reads as a suggestion rather than a binding law--that doesn't expressly prohibit retailers from neglecting to provide suitable seating. The court tossed out this argument, ruling that suitable seating requirements could be enforced by employees under PAGA, and employees are entitled to recover $100 per pay period for the initial violation and double that for each subsequent violation--penalties that add up for the California retailers who employ hundreds of thousands of workers.

Continue reading " California Retail Stores Hit with Flurry of Suitable Seating Lawsuits " »

Our attorneys recently posted a Long Beach, California employment lawyers blog, discussing employment misclassification in the workplace and the importance of understanding the difference between an employee's exempt or non-exempt status--as the misclassification of an employee could lead to violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).

In related news, Xe Services, formerly known as Blackwater, has been sued in a $60 million class-action lawsuit--where 3,000 former employees of the security and training company claim that they have been misclassified and therefore deprived of important employee benefits.

Under the lawsuit, former workers who have been employed by the company in Afghanistan, Iraq and other countries, are accusing Xe of misclassifying workers as independent contractors instead of employees, to avoid providing health, disability and pension plans, paying Social Security taxes, and contributing to state unemployment funds--all required for covered employees under the FLSA.

According to the lawsuit, many workers have come home from war zones with physical or psychological wounds and are being denied important health care because they are being improperly classified as independent contractors.

Continue reading "Workers File $60M Lawsuit Against Blackwater/Xe for Employee Misclassification" »

In a recent Los Angeles, California employment law case, two Home Depot employees brought action against the home improvement store under the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA), for failing to provide suitable employee seating.

The plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and former and current employees, claimed that Home Depot violated an IWC wage order providing that employers in the retail industry are required to provide their employees with suitable seats when the nature of their work reasonably permits the use of seats.

Under Wage Order 7-2001, Section 14, which contains provisions regulating working hours, minimum wage and other issues including suitable seating--when employees' active duties are not changed, and the nature of their work requires standing, a reasonable number of suitable seats should be placed in proximity to their employment area, and the employees should be allowed to use these seats as long as it does not interfere with their work performance.

The employees claimed that although the cashier and counter areas within the 100 stores in California contain enough space for employee seats, Home Depot did not provided such seats--violating a wage order of the IWC. The plaintiffs sought to recover civil penalties from Home Depot under PAGA as well as reasonable attorney fees and costs.

Continue reading "Home Depot Sued for Civil Penalties in Suitable Seating Case" »

In a recent disability discrimination lawsuit development that our Newport Beach labor and employment attorneys have been following, a BP convenience store in Wisconsin has been sued by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) for firing an employee because of her disabilities--a violation of federal civil rights.

The lawsuit states that the BP One Stop, a Meffert Oil-owned convenience store fired a female employee who suffers from panic attacks and interstitial familial pulmonary fibrosis, for leaving work to seek medical attention for her health conditions.

According to the EEOC, no employee should be forced to choose between their employment or necessary health and medical treatments, and that BP allegedly discarded this worker because of her medical conditions--apparently considering her useless as an employee because of her disability. The EEOC is hoping in the lawsuit to seek lost wages and punitive and compensatory damages, along with discriminatory practices and injunctive relief.

Under Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) it is illegal to engage in disability discrimination in the workplace, and employers must reasonably accommodate the known mental or physical limitations of a disabled individual, applicant or employee who is qualified for the job--unless accommodating the disabled employee would cause undue hardship in the operation of the employer's business.

Continue reading "BP One Stop Sued For Discriminating Against Disabled Employee" »

According to a recent article in the Los Angeles Times that our Santa Ana, California labor and employment attorneys have been following, two farm labor contractor companies have been ordered by the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) to pay $91,300 in back pay and fines--after DOL investigations found the company responsible for engaging in unsafe employment conditions and wage violations.

The labor department reportedly began investigating the labor companies, Mid-Valley Labor Services and Ayala Corp., after two 2010 traffic incidents killed six migrant and seasonal farm workers, and seriously injured six other employees. The DOL found both companies failed to provide workplace protections to agricultural workers, violating the Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act.

Under the federal act, is critical that farm employers and labor contractors provide a safe means of transportation for agricultural workers and use drivers that are properly licensed. The DOL investigation found that Mid-Valley Labor Services reportedly failed to check that drivers had current and valid licenses or necessary insurance coverage. Ayala Corporation also reportedly failed to provide transportation to its farm workers that was safe, and failed to provide vehicle insurance to its drivers.

The DOL also found that Mid-Valley Labor Services responsible for failing to pay 114 farm workers their wages on time, illegally charging workers for their transportation, and neglecting to compensate employees for any employment activities performed before their farm shifts began. The department recovered nearly $50,000 in back wages for the 114 Mid-Valley workers and $960 for six Ayala Corp. workers.

Continue reading "California Farm Labor Companies Fined for Wage Violations and Unsafe Conditions" »

Employee Misclassification continues to be a nationwide employment problem, as our attorneys have discussed in a related Carson, California employment lawyers blog, where employers often misclassify workers as independent contractors instead of employees, making them "exempt" from overtime laws. Many employers across the country misclassify employees by mistake, while other employers take advantage of employee misclassification to avoid paying minimum wage, social security, overtime, and other important employee benefits.

In a recent employee misclassification lawsuit development, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) has secured a federal court summary judgment requiring International Detective & Protective Services (IDPS) to pay 57 private security guards over $200,000 in liquidated damages and back pay for violating Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) provisions related to overtime and record-keeping.

According to the DOL investigation, the security company classified private security guards as independent contractors and failed to compensate the workers one and one-half their hourly pay rates for any hours worked beyond forty in a workweek, as required by FLSA law for covered employees. Judge Kendall concluded that IDPS attempted to misclassify the security guards by providing them with an Independent Contractor agreement to sign, in order to avoid the responsibility of paying the workers in accordance to the FLSA's overtime requirements--making the company responsible for overtime compensation that was unpaid.

Judge Kendall also found that as the company has shown no compliance in the past with FLSA regulations, even after the DOL gave prior warnings about the company's improper classification of the security guards, the court has ordered a permanent injunction stopping IDPS from future federal wage and hour violations.

Continue reading "Court Awards Over $200K to Security Guards in Employment Misclassification Lawsuit Resolution" »

According to a recent press release in the Wall Street Journal that our Riverside labor and employment attorneys have been following, one of the world's largest pharmaceutical drug companies, AstraZeneca will reportedly pay 124 female employees $250,000, after the women experienced gender-based pay discrimination while working in the company's business center in Pennsylvania.

This action reportedly settles the U.S. Department of Labor's (DOL) lawsuit accusing the drug company of engaging in gender discrimination by paying female sales specialists salary compensation that was around $1,700 less than male employees with the same job title and responsibilities.

AstraZeneca reportedly holds a contract with the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs valued at over $2 billion to provide pharmaceutical products to medical centers and hospitals around the country. In 2002 the DOL's Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) performed a scheduled compliance review of AstraZeneca's business center and found that the drug company failed to meet its federal contractor obligations--to make sure that employees were paid fairly without race, color, sex, religion and national origin discrimination.

The Director of the (OFCCP) Patricia A. Shiu, stated that this case proves that 48 years after the Equal Pay Act was signed by President Kennedy, women are still struggling for fair pay. Shiu stated that she is glad AstraZeneca agreed to pay its employees what they earned, and that the OFCCP looks forward to continuing the work with AstraZeneca to ensure that this kind of gender-based pay discrimination does not happen again in the future.

Continue reading "AstraZeneca to Pay $250K in Gender Discrimination Pay Lawsuit Settlement" »

In a recent Pomona, California labor and employment lawyer blog, our attorneys discussed a current $1.5 million disability discrimination lawsuit judgment, where the City of Los Angeles was found to have violated the FEHA for not reasonably accommodating a disabled LAPD officer.

In related disability discrimination lawsuit news, an Illinois federal court jury decided on a $600,000 verdict against AutoZone, Inc., for not providing a disabled employee with reasonable accommodation.

According to the lawsuit, brought by the U.S. Equal Employment Commission (EEOC), AutoZone required a disabled sales manager to perform specific cleaning duties that violated his disability restrictions. The employee, who had been working for the store since 2003, had permanent neck and back injuries that prevented him from performing the tasks. The EEOC claimed in the lawsuit that the sales manager could perform all of the essential functions of his job--other than the assigned cleaning task of mopping floors--that according to the EEOC not an essential function of his sales manager position, and could be reassigned to another employee.

The sales manager reportedly asked if this cleaning duty could be reassigned to another employee, as it conflicted with this physical disability. The new store manager denied his request, requiring him to mop, which allegedly added to the further injury of the employee, as well as a medical leave of absence.

Continue reading " AutoZone to Pay $600K for Disability Discrimination and Failure to Accommodate " »

A wage and hour lawsuit was filed this week by the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) against a Texas agency, seeking over $1 million in back wages and overtime compensation for employees of a child welfare agency in Texas.

According an article in the Houston Chronicle that our Irvine, California labor lawyers have been following, the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services Child Protective Services Division is being sued by the federal agency for allegedly denying 800 former and current civil servant workers the proper overtime that they were legally entitled to under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The workers were also allegedly instructed to not record the overtime hours that they worked, and instead work off the clock with no compensation.

Under the FLSA, covered employees are entitled to at least the minimum wage of $7.25 for every hour worked, plus overtime rates of time and one-half their regular pay rates for working over forty hours in a workweek, including bonuses, incentive pay and commissions.

The DOL reportedly conducted a statewide investigation of the agency over a three-year period, and seeks over $1 million in back wages, as well as an equal amount in damages for the former and current Child Protective Services investigators.

Continue reading "Labor Department Sues Child Protective Agency for Back Wages and Overtime Pay" »

In recent news that our Fullerton, California labor and employment attorneys have been following, the City of Los Angeles lost a disability discrimination lawsuit, after a Court of Appeal upheld a $1.5 million judgment against the city, for failing to grant an officer of the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD), Rory Cuiellette, reasonable accommodation, after he was disabled by a job injury.

According to the lawsuit, after Cuiellette was injured, a worker's compensation proceeding gave him a 100% permanent disability rating. Cuiellette was allowed to resume work by his doctor, as long as he worked in a position of light-duty, with administrative work only--a position typically reserved for accommodating disabled officers. After five days working as a permanent light-duty desk, the LAPD realized that Cuiellette had been granted the 100% disability rating by workman's compensation, at which point his employment was terminated and he was told to go home.

Cuiellette then filed a lawsuit against the City, claiming disability discrimination and failure to reasonably accommodate an employee--a violation of the FEHA, the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, among other employment claims.

In a recent news release, our Riverside employment attorneys learned that a jury awarded Cuiellette $1,571,500, and after three different appeals, the court reaffirmed the jury award in Cuiellette's favor--rejecting the City's stance that he was unable to perform the duties of a police officer with or without reasonable accommodations. Substantial evidence also supported the court's finding that the City of Los Angeles violated the FEHA when it sent Cuiellette home based on the 100% disability rating, and when it failed to reasonably accommodate the officer in his light-duty assignment.

Continue reading "$1.5 Million Judgment Upheld in LAPD Disability Discrimination Lawsuit" »

According to a recent California sexual harassment lawsuit settlement that our Riverside employment attorneys have been following, Monterey Gourmet Foods, Inc. a maker of gourmet food items, has agreed to pay four Hispanic workers $535,000 to settle a sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit.

The lawsuit, filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, (EEOC), claims that one male and three female workers were sexually harassed by a male supervisor-- who starting in 2006 used sexual comments, unwanted sexual touching, and obscene pictures to harass the workers.

The workers told the management about the harassment, but the company reportedly overlooked the harassment and neglected to take effective measures to correct the work environment. Two years later, in 2008, only a few weeks after the EEOC filed discrimination charges, the workers were reportedly dismissed for their employment duties in retaliation.

Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, sexual harassment is against the law, as well as retaliation for reporting harassment. Under the consent decree terms, Monterey Gourmet Foods will compensate the workers $535,000 and has agreed to strengthen the company's anti-harassment policy, to provide harassment prevention training to employees and managers, and inform the EEOC about any complaints of harassment or retaliation in the future.

Continue reading "California Gourmet Foods Company to Pay $535K in Sexual Harassment and Retaliation Lawsuit Settlement" »

In recent news that our Chino Hills, California labor and employment attorneys have been following, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) has ordered the owner and manager of three Illinois restaurants to pay nearly $1,150,000 in monetary damages and back wages to 64 employees working as kitchen staff and restaurant servers, after a department investigation found that the restaurants engaged in violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA.)

According to the investigation, Dolores Onate and Ricardo Ornate, the owner and manager of the El Caporal and El Matador restaurants, willfully and also repeatedly violated the minimum wage, overtime, and record-keeping provisions of the FLSA, by forcing employees to repay their hard earned wages in an attempt to conceal the restaurants' wage and hour violations.

The DOL found that many employees of the restaurants failed to receive any actual payment from the paychecks they received--as they were reportedly required to return the checks to the restaurants. Also, kitchen staff, dishwashers and busboys were not reportedly paid according to federal law, and did not receive minimum wage compensation or overtime payment. These employees were also required to return some of the payment from their checks.

Other wait staff employees reportedly only took home tips from customers that they served. Employees were also often forced to clock into work at a specific time, even if they had already started their job shift earlier.

Continue reading "Mexican Restaurants To Pay Over $1M in Back Wages and Overtime" »