Forest & Einstein Faces Labor Law Violation Allegations

In recent news, Forest & Einstein faces labor law violation allegations after allegedly failing to pay their employees for all their hours.

The Case: Keisha Garrett v. Forest & Einstein Staffing, Inc.

The Court: San Francisco County Superior Court of the State of California

The Case No.: CGC-24-611638

The Plaintiff: Keisha Garrett v. Forest & Einstein Staffing, Inc.

The plaintiff in the case, Keisha Garrett, worked for Forest & Einstein Staffing Inc. from October 2020 through August 2023 as a non-exempt hourly employee protected by labor law. Garrett claims that during her employment, the company utilized standard business practices that failed to fully compensate employees for all their hours worked. Garrett filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of herself and other current and former Forest & Einstein Staffing, Inc. employees in similar situations.

The Defendant: Keisha Garrett v. Forest & Einstein Staffing, Inc.

The defendant in the case, Forest & Einstein Staffing, Inc., operates a staffing company in California, including San Francisco County, where the plaintiff worked. According to the class action wage and hour lawsuit, the company allegedly violated several labor laws, including failing to pay minimum wage and overtime, failing to reimburse employees for necessary business expenditures, failing to provide employees with required meal breaks and rest periods, failing to provide workers with accurate itemized wage statements, and failing to provide workers with their full wages when they were due.

The Case: Keisha Garrett v. Forest & Einstein Staffing, Inc.

The case, Keisha Garrett v. Forest & Einstein Staffing, Inc., is currently pending in the San Francisco County Superior Court of the State of California. The plaintiff in the case claims that the defendant required her to work while she was clocked out during what was supposed to be her off-duty meal break. Garrett also claims she sometimes didn’t even receive a partial lunch break.

If you have questions about filing an employment law lawsuit, please contact Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in various law firm offices in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.

Traditions Drywall Faces Allegations of Labor Law Violations in New Class Action

Traditions Drywall faces allegations that their standard business practices constitute labor law violations.

The Case: Hector Mariscal v. Traditions Drywall, Inc.

The Court: Superior Court of the State of California, San Diego County

The Case No.: 37-2023-00053021-CU-OE-CTL

The Plaintiff: Hector Mariscal v. Traditions Drywall, Inc.

The plaintiff in the case, Hector Mariscal,worked for Traditions Drywall in San Diego, California from March 2023 to June 2023 as a nonexempt hourly employee. He alleges he and other similarly placed employees at Traditions Drywall could not take the off-duty meal breaks and rest periods California employers must provide workers under labor law. When Traditions Drywall employees were provided their meal break, they were allegedly not fully relieved from their work duties; instead, they were regularly interrupted during their off-duty meal break time to complete job duties and tasks on behalf of their employer.

The Defendant: Hector Mariscal v. Traditions Drywall, Inc.

The defendant in the case, Traditions Drywall, Inc., is a construction company that operates in California. The plaintiff,m Hector Mariscal, worked for Traditions Drywall in San Diego. The company is accused of numerous labor law violations in the California class action lawsuit, including:

• failure to pay minimum and overtime wages

• failure to provide mandated meal and rest periods

• failure to reimburse for business expenses

• failure to deliver wages when due

• failure to issue accurate wage statements

The Case: Hector Mariscal v. Traditions Drywall, Inc.

Hector Mariscal v. Traditions Drywall, Inc. is currently pending in the San Diego County Superior Court of the State of California. According to the California wage and hour class action lawsuit, Traditions Drywall employees were allegedly required to work five (5) hours during a shift without receiving an off-duty meal break. Additionally, the lawsuit claims that Traditions Drywall did not provide workers their second off-duty meal period on work days when they completed (10) hours or more shifts. According to the complaint, Traditions Drywall's business policies allegedly meant that employees remained on-call and on duty during their "off duty" meal periods. As a result, employees regularly forfeited their meal breaks. The plaintiffs claim they were not provided additional compensation for their forfeited off-duty meal breaks and that the Traditions Drywall business policy and practice on this topic violates labor law.

If you have questions about how to file a California class action lawsuit, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to help you in various law firm offices in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.

Staffing Solution Company Faces Overtime Violations Class Action Allegations

In recent news, Libra Staffing and Samuel Hale face class action allegations. Plaintiffs allege the company engaged in wage and hour violations and overtime violations.

The Case: Aurora Gonzalez v. Libra Staffing Inc. and Samuel Hale, LLC

The Court: Los Angeles County Superior Court

The Case No.: 23STCV25896

The Plaintiff: Aurora Gonzalez v. Libra Staffing Inc. and Samuel Hale, LLC

The plaintiff in the case, Aurora Gonzalez, filed a class action complaint against the defendant, citing overtime pay violations. Gonzalez was employed by the defendants in April 2022 and worked for them through May 2022. Gonzalez was paid on an hourly basis as a non-exempt employee and, as such, was entitled to all legally required meal breaks and rest periods as well as the payment of minimum wage for all hours worked and overtime wages as outlined by labor law for all hours worked over 8 in one day or 40 in one workweek.

The Defendant: Aurora Gonzalez v. Libra Staffing Inc. and Samuel Hale, LLC

The defendant in the case, Libra Staffing Inc. and Samuel Hale, LLC, is a Florida limited liability company that conducts a substantial amount of business in Los Angeles County, where the plaintiff works. Samuel Hale operates a professional employer organization that provides various business services, including administrative tasks, payroll services, benefits administration, etc. Libra Staffing and Samuel Hale are listed as joint employers of Aurora Gonzalez in Aurora Gonzalez v. Libra Staffing Inc. and Samuel Hale, LLC. Gonzalez’s class action complaint alleges that Libra Staffing and Samuel Hale utilized uniform policies and practices that failed to compensate employees for all their hours worked fully.

The Allegations: Aurora Gonzalez v. Libra Staffing Inc. and Samuel Hale, LLC

According to the class action allegations, the defendant failed to provide legally compliant meal and rest periods, failed to compensate employees for missed meal and rest periods accurately, failed to provide payment for all hours worked, failed to compensate employees for off-the-clock work, failed to pay workers for overtime hours at the correct regular rate of pay, failed to pay workers meal rest premiums at the regular rate, failed to reimburse workers for business expenses, and failed to issue accurate itemized wage statements to their employees (showing hourly wage rates applicable during the designated period, and all hours worked). Plaintiffs in the case argue that the defendant's uniform practices and policies were purposefully designed to avoid full payment for workers for all hours worked, which was economically damaging to workers while allowing the company to create an unfair advantage over competitors in compliance with labor laws.

The Case: Aurora Gonzalez v. Libra Staffing Inc. and Samuel Hale, LLC

Gonzalez filed the wage and hour and overtime pay class action seeking relief for herself and members of the class who were economically injured due to the defendant’s uniform practices and policies about payroll record-keeping practices, wage payment, and overtime pay calculation policies. The case is currently pending in the Los Angeles County Superior Court of the State of California.

If you have questions about how to file an overtime complaint, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced California employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in various law firm offices in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.

Elite Bohemian Grove Club Faces Class Action Alleging Employment Law Violations

In recent news, an elite secret club called Bohemian Grove faces labor law violation allegations, including failing to pay overtime and not giving workers breaks.

The Case: Gregg et al. v. Bohemian Club et al.

The Court: U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California

The Case No.: 3:2023cv02760

The Plaintiff: Gregg et al. v. Bohemian Club et al.

The plaintiffs in the case, Anthony Gregg, Wallid Saad, Shawn Claiborne, filed the proposed class action on June 25, 2023, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, demanding a jury trial. The plaintiffs are former Bohemian Grove valets who worked at the club’s Monte Rio summer camp in Sonoma County, California, for several years. They allege unfair labor practices, including 16-hour workdays with no breaks and failing to pay overtime and minimum wages.

The Defendant: Gregg et al. v. Bohemian Club et al.

The defendant in the case, Bohemian Grove, one of the most elite and secretive clubs in the U.S. (with Reagan and Nixon listed among its elite membership), faces multiple labor law allegations:

1. Failure to Pay Minimum Wage

2. Collective Action - Violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA, 29 U.S.C. 201, et seq.)

3. Failure to Provide Meal Periods

4. Failure to Provide Paid Rest Breaks

5. Failure to Pay All Wages at Termination (Labor Code Section 201-203)

6. Failure to Provide Accurate Wage Statements

7. Unfair Business Practices; 8. Violation of Labor Code Section 2699 (PAGA)

Bohemian Grove attracts some of the world’s most powerful people to mysterious gatherings in the woods outside of San Francisco, California, and has long been the focus of conspiracy theorists and general fascination. The plaintiffs worked for several years at Bohemian Grove’s Monte Rio summer camp in Sonoma County, California (a secretive 2,700-acre camp near the Russian River that’s been in operation every summer for 150 years). The club lists 2,600 active members and a significant wait list.

The Case: Gregg et al. v. Bohemian Club et al.

The lawsuit alleges that the Bohemian Club is comprised of 100 camps, each with one or more captains who consistently violate numerous labor laws yearly. The lawsuit alleges that the Bohemian Grove treasurer, B. Dawson, personally directed valets to falsify payroll records and perform work off the clock. According to complaints in the lawsuit, throughout the 14-day summer camp each year, workers were consistently paid for eight hours when working 16-plus hour workdays without breaks. The plaintiffs are seeking class-action status. If certified, the class action status would affect 300 employees. The plaintiffs seek up to $1.5 million in damages from the all-male Bohemian Grove club.

If you have questions about how to file a California overtime class action lawsuit, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw L.L.P. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in various law firm offices in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.

Proposed $8.369M Settlement in Google Overtime Class Action

In recent news, The Northern District of California district court offered preliminary approval of an $8.369 million settlement in an overtime lawsuit alleging Google neglected to include sign-on bonuses and vested restricted stock units in overtime calculations.

The Case: Cody Bowlay-Williams et al. v. Google, LLC

The Court: Northern District of California

The Case No.: 4:21-cv-09942

The Plaintiff: Cody Bowlay-Williams et al. v. Google, LLC

The plaintiff in the case, Cody Bowlay-Williams, filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of more than 6,500 Google employees nationwide. The lawsuit alleged Google omitted sign-on bonuses and vested restricted stock units from overtime pay calculations. In doing so, Google allegedly failed to comply with the overtime pay rate mandated by labor law. The workers claim the omission was made to benefit the company while shorting hourly workers full pay for overtime hours worked.

The Defendant: Cody Bowlay-Williams et al. v. Google, LLC

The defendant in the case, Google, is most well-known as a popular internet search engine. However, the multinational technology company has many focuses, including artificial intelligence, online advertising, and search engine technology. The lawsuit was filed on behalf of hourly Google employees in the U.S. employed between December 22, 2018, and June 5, 2022, who were awarded restricted stock units that vested during that period or received a sign-on bonus during that same time. (The period extends to December 22, 2017, for Google employees in California).

The Case: Cody Bowlay-Williams et al. v. Google, LLC

A proposed settlement of $8.369 million was given preliminary approval by the District Court of Northern California on March 13, 2023. The settlement allocations go to over 6,500 non-exempt hourly Google employees in the class. California class members were included automatically, and qualifying class members outside of California were sent a Notice (by mail and email) offering them the opportunity to submit a Consent to Join form to join the settlement. The Consent to Join form was due June 5, 2023. The court scheduled the final approval hearing for July 27, 2023. The case is a reminder for California employers to double-check that all forms of eligible compensation are included in overtime rate of pay calculations.

If you have questions about how to file a California overtime class action, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in various law firm offices in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.

California Class Action Claims DWWH, Inc. dba Weir Canyon Honda Violated Labor Law

In an April 2023 California class action, plaintiffs claimed DWWH, Inc. dba Weir Canyon Honda violated employment law when they failed to provide legally mandated off-duty meal breaks and rest periods.

The Case: Alejandro Estrada Ureno v. DWWH, Inc. dba Weir Canyon Honda

The Court: Orange County Superior Court of the State of California

The Case No.: 30-2023-01316346-CU-OE-CXC

The Plaintiff: Alejandro Estrada Ureno v. DWWH, Inc. dba Weir Canyon Honda

The plaintiff in the case, Alejandro Estrada Ureno, worked for Weir Canyon Honda in California since July 2022. As an employee paid through a combination of hourly/commission-based compensation, Ureno was entitled to protection under state and federal employment law, including payment of minimum wage and accurate overtime pay and receiving legally required meal breaks and rest periods. In the class action filed in April 2023, Ureno claims Weir Canyon Honda’s standard practices and policies did not lawfully compensate employees.

The Defendant: Alejandro Estrada Ureno v. DWWH, Inc. dba Weir Canyon Honda

The defendant in the case, DWWH, Inc. dba Weir Canyon Honda, is a California corporation that owns and operates car dealerships in California, including the dealership in Orange County that employed Ureno.

The Allegations: Alejandro Estrada Ureno v. DWWH, Inc. dba Weir Canyon Honda

Ureno made numerous labor law violation allegations in the California class action.

• Meal and Rest Period Violations

• Regular Pay Rate Violations (Overtime, Double Time, Meal and Rest Break Premiums, and Sick Pay)

• Commission and Piece-Rate Violations

• Off-the-Clock Minimum Wage and Overtime Violations

• Unreimbursed Business Expenses

• Wage Statement Violations

• Failure to Pay Wages on Time

• Unlawful Deductions

The Case: Alejandro Estrada Ureno v. DWWH, Inc. dba Weir Canyon Honda

In Alejandro Estrada Ureno v. DWWH, Inc. dba Weir Canyon Honda, Ureno seeks class action certification, an order preventing the defendant from engaging in similar labor law violations moving forward, an order seeking compensation and restitution for unpaid overtime wages and other unlawfully retained sums allegedly due the class members, and meal and rest break compensation for missed breaks.

If you have questions about how to file a California class action lawsuit, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in various law firm offices in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.

Class Action Accuses VNA Hospice of Overtime Pay Violations

In the Mark Carter v. VNA Hospice class action, VNA Hospice is accused of violating overtime pay requirements governed by labor law.

The Case: Mark Carter v. VNA Hospice and Palliative Care of Southern California

The Court: San Bernardino County Superior Court for the State of California

The Case No.: CIVDS1909598

The Plaintiff: Mark Carter v. VNA Hospice

The plaintiff in the case, Mark Carter, filed a class action lawsuit against VNA Hospice, claiming the company failed to compensate hourly employees with accurate overtime wages. According to Carter, the company allegedly failed to pay their non-exempt workers non-discretionary incentive wages calculated based on their performance on the job. The plaintiff argues that the bonuses should have been included in the employee’s regular pay rate for overtime wage calculation. The plaintiffs also allege the company failed to provide their California employees with meal and rest periods in compliance with the California Labor Code.

The Defendant: Mark Carter v. VNA Hospice

The defendant in the case, VNA Hospice, allegedly committed various California Labor Code violations by failing to pay its employees the proper overtime wages.

The Case: Mark Carter v. VNA Hospice

The case, Mark Carter v. VNA Hospice, includes claims that the company’s overtime calculations were not based on an accurate regular pay rate – leading to the plaintiff and other non-exempt employees of VNA Hospice being underpaid in overtime wages. The class action complaint seeks penalties for missed rest periods and meal breaks based on the company’s lack of standard policy and practices providing employees with legally mandated breaks, minimum wage, and accurate overtime pay.

If you have questions about how to file a California overtime class action lawsuit, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in various law firm offices in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.