Lyft Settles California Overtime Lawsuit

Lyft and Uber are both very similar businesses that allow any person to sign up as a driver and when they are needed, they go to the given pick up spot and take their customer where ever they ask to go. The companies take pride in being very lenient and easy - allowing their workers to have a full personal life while still keeping a good paying job.

After being hit with several lawsuits filed towards Lyft from thousands of the company's drivers, saying they were seen as independent contractors rather than employees, Lyft has decided to settle. This agreement to settle leaves Uber, a similar car ride service, alone to face the driver's lawsuits that state that they should get sick days and overtime pay alike all other employees. 

According to resources Lyft has agreed to the final terms of the lawsuit and also to paying a total of $12.25 million to the affected drivers. The settlement will give the drivers conditions that apply more to the independent contractor, even though the lawsuit was filed to achieve employee status.

The difference between an employee and an independent contractor is that the employee receives more benefits and rights, but is more controlled by their employer. Whereas an independent contractor has far more flexibility in their schedule and payment, but do not get overtime pay, sick days, or any other benefits that an employee may receive.

The drivers claim that they were not being given the benefits, but were being controlled more than they should have been. Lyft has addressed the benefits matter by saying hey will be giving "portable benefits" to their workers but have not stated what this entails.

Arbitration clauses were in both Uber's and Lyft's driver agreements, but were disregarded by the plaintiffs when the lawsuits were filed originally. Lyft has agreed to pay for the arbitration fees as part of the settlement. Uber's arbitration clause was rendered invalid by the judge, but the same didn't go for the clause in Lyft's agreement.

If you are in need of assistance regarding a misclassification in the workplace or unpaid overtime, please contact the experienced southern California employment law attorneys at Blumenthal, Nordrehaug & Bhowmik. We would be glad to assist you. 

Caretaker Sues Betty White for Unpaid Wages and Rest Period Violations

In recent news, Betty White is being sued by a former caretaker. The caretaker turned plaintiff was a long time, live-in employee named Anita Maynard. Maynard filed suit in Los Angeles alleging that Betty White did not pay her overtime and did not allow her breaks as required by California state labor law.

Betty White is most well known for her work on the TV show, Golden Girls. The popular TV show featured four older women who lived together in Miami, Florida that were experiencing the joys and pains and annoyances of their “golden years.” Betty White played the role of the spacey, but sweet Rose alongside Dorothy, Blanche and Sophia (Dorothy’s mom in the show). The show is widely known and many recognize it from the theme song along, “Thank You for Being a Friend.” The actress is now 94 years old.

Maynard claims that she was a live-in domestic worker for Betty White for over 20 years. During this time, she alleges that White did not provide her with payment for overtime hours even though she put in more than 14 hours on a typical day. Maynard’s complaint, includes additional allegations:

·       That White required Maynard to work six days/week without overtime rates for the sixth day.

·       That since discontinuing employment on March 11th, Maynard has not received all of her earned wages or vacation pay due.

·       That she earned less than the legal minimum wage according to California state labor law.

Maynard seeks wages owed, penalties and attorney’s fees through the court. A representative for Betty White responded to the legal actions by stating that Betty White has worked with thousands of people throughout her lifetime and none of them have anything negative to say about the well-loved actress. She went on to describe Betty as a kind person who is simply nice to everyone she runs into and will continue to make her purpose in life making other people happy.

If you need additional information on what qualifies for overtime pay and/or how to recognize violations of wage and hour laws, please contact one of the southern California employment law attorneys at Blumenthal, Nordrehaug & Bhowmik.

"Top Chef" Finalist Settles Wage and Overtime Lawsuit

Top chef is a television series aired on the Bravo channel. On the popular TV show, unknown chefs looking to make it big in the restaurant world are able to compete for the title of "Top Chef". In addition to the general prestige that comes with winning the title, the purpose of the competition is to win the ultimate chef's “Top Chef” prize package, which includes $125,000 and a food showcase at the Food and Wine Classic in Aspen, Colorado. Bryan Voltaggio was a contestant on the sixth season of Top Chef. Near the end of the season, Voltaggio was one of the top finalists who went on to create and own four very popular restaurants: VOLT, Lunchbox, RANGE, and Family Meal. 

In recent news, several previous employees of "Top Chef" star Bryan Voltaggio have been attempting to negotiate a settlement of their federal lawsuit filed against him. (The settlement's terms were confidential and disclosed in a U.S. District Court document). Legal representation for the parties in the case was not able to discuss the terms of the agreement.  

The group of former employees sued Voltaggio in September of 2014. He was accused of violations of the minimum wage and overtime provisions stated in the Fair Labor Standards Act. According to Court recorded documents it was a mandatory obligation that the employees appear at work at least three hours before the appointed shift time. They were also required to stay from two to six hours after they had clocked out for the day. Plaintiffs were also required to work "off the clock" which means they had to work as they would during a shift, but could not clock in and receive payment until the scheduled shift had started. 

What is Off the Clock Work?  

When discussing employment law and payment for wages earned, Off the Clock Work refers to the legal right of every non-exempt employee to be compensated for their hours worked. Hours worked refers to all time an employee is required to be on duty, on the premises of their workplace, or other location employee is required to be in order to fulfill work duties. When an employee is required to work without “clocking in” or counting their hours for payment, this is often referred to as off the clock work.

When Voltaggio was informed of these charges he responded to the accusations with an email stating that his attorney was reviewing the claims. He also stated that he was sure that the plaintiffs were incorrect; that he did nothing wrong.  

If you have additional questions about off the clock work, or what qualifies as a failure to pay overtime, please get in touch with the southern California employment law attorneys at Blumenthal, Nordrehaug & Bhowmik. 

CVS $7.5M Wage Deal to Cover One Thousand Pharmacists

Final approval has been granted for the $7.4 million settlement between CVS Pharmacy, Inc. and the class of over 1,000 pharmacists. Pharmacists lodged allegations of unlawful denial of overtime pay when working over six days consecutively. The final approval hearing was held in Los Angeles Superior Court with Judge Elihu M. Berle granting the final approval for the proposed settlement.

Pharmacists included in the class action work or previously worked in three different CVS California regions. They filed a claim that they worked the “seven-day week,” but were not paid overtime. The judge noted that the plaintiffs believed they had viable claims, but that they were also aware that CVS did not believe their practices were in violation of wage and hour laws. The judge felt the settlement was fair and reasonable and that the plaintiffs were appropriately weighing the benefits of prevailing against risks posed by trial and potential delays of appeals, etc.

No class members objected to the settlement. Only seven class members opted out. Claims were filed for 85% of workweeks at issue in approving the settlement/deal. Plaintiffs’ request for attorneys’ fees of $2.49 million was also approved by the judge.

The three suits were filed in October 2013 alleging violations of California labor code on the part of CVS pharmacy due to requirement of pharmacists working over six days in a row without payment of overtime (time and a half for any hours worked on the seventh day of consecutive work). Preliminary approval was granted by Judge Berle in July after parties used the help of a mediator to come to a tentative agreement.

The agreement will result in each class member receiving approximately $2,846. The actual amount will depend upon the number of workweeks the pharmacist worked during the time period designated by the class action.

If you have questions regarding the class action process or any other southern California employment law issue, please get in touch with the attorneys at Blumenthal, Nordrehaug & Bhowmik today. We can answer your questions and provide you with the legal counsel you need. 

Quest Diagnostics Faces Allegations of Failure to Pay Overtime

The calculation of overtime requires that employers include any “extra” pay such as commissions or bonuses. When employers fail to do so, they are in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). This is the issue that Quest Diagnostics faces in the class action overtime suit they are currently up against.

Lead plaintiff in the class action (Avila v. Quest Diagnostics Clinical Laboratories Inc. et al.) claims that the Company did not provide proper pay to hundreds of hourly employees. They failed to include automatic incentive payments when they completed overtime rate calculations. The named plaintiff was a referral assistant and testing assistant in the West Hills, California location. She claimed her typical work week was over 40 hours. She also alleges that when she was paid overtime, her non-discretionary bonuses (called “Recognition Quest” and “Goal Sharing Bonus” at Quest Diagnostics) were not included when they calculated her regular rate of pay. This is in violation of state employment law as well as federal law (Fair Labor Standards Act or FLSA). She states that her employer miscalculated overtime in this way as a matter of policy. She also claims that over 500 workers can be included in the class that are or were affected by policies and practices addressed by the suit. The lawsuit alleges violations of both FLSA and California Labor Law. It also alleges violations through failure to provide timely wage payment when employment is discontinued and additional violations of California Unfair Competition Law.

Employers should remember that sums employees derive from employment (whether “promised” to them or stated in employment policy, i.e. commissions, earned bonuses, etc.) have to be included when completing calculations of the regular rate (or base rate of pay) in relation to overtime pay. When this is not handled correctly, employers can expect to eventually face a FLSA collective action like the one Quest Diagnostics is currently handling.

If you have questions regarding overtime pay calculations or class action status, please get in touch with the southern California employment attorneys at Blumenthal, Nordrehaug & Bhowmik.

Staff Assistance Inc. Faces Claims of Overtime and Meal Break Violations

Blumenthal, Nordrehaug & Bhowmik filed a proposed class action Complaint against Staff Assistance, Inc. (SAI) on December 29, 2014 alleging labor law violations. The suit is currently pending in the Los Angeles County Superior Court. A full copy of the complaint is available online, but a brief summary outlining the main points of the suit follows. 

SAI is a California based company that offers home health, palliative care, caregiving and hospice care services through an extensive network of employees. Licensed Vocational Nurses employed by SAI filed the suit listing allegations of numerous violations of California Labor Laws.

Allegations included in the suit against SAI:

·       Licensed Vocational Nurses were required to work unpaid hours, resulting in a failure to pay both wages and overtime.

·       Failure to provide accurate and complete wage statements (enabling the company to avoid payment of overtime wages).

·       SAI failed to abide by legally required meal breaks – according to California law, employers must provide all non-exempt employees that receive hourly wages with thirty minute meal periods before they complete five hours on the job. Failure to provide an uninterrupted meal period as required results in a penalty of one hour of pay according to the California Labor Code.

·       Failure to provide reimbursement for expenses incurred while employees fulfilled job duties (such as costs of travel/gas when traveling from job site to job site as assigned). This is in direct violation of California Labor Code Section 2802 requiring California employers to indemnify employees for any and all expenses that are incurred while in the course of fulfilling the requirements of their employment.

Allegations made in the suit indicate that the company’s practice to avoid paying overtime wages is based on uniform policy evident in SAI business records.

To get additional information about the class action lawsuit against Staff Assistance, Inc., please get in touch with one of the attorneys at Blumenthal, Nordrehaug and Bhowmik at (866) 771-7099 or get answers online here. The southern California employment law attorneys at Blumenthal, Nordrehaug and Bhowmik can assist you out of offices in: Los Angeles, San Diego, or San Francisco. Get in touch if you need someone to help you fight unfair business practices, or violations of the labor law in the workplace. 

Mexican Farm Workers Strike: Demanding Overtime Pay, Breaks, Water and Healthcare

April 28, 2015 - The Associated Press states that the average farm worker will make between $8-10 for a full 10-hour day of labor. Supporting yourself on such an income is difficult. Supporting your family on such an income is close to impossible. The Baja, California Mexican farm workers strike involves fifty thousand. Their strike is an aggressive method of protesting low wages, poor living/working conditions as well as general right abuses.

As the Mexican farm workers and the growers attempt to come together to resolve the issue, millions in crops have rotted in the field as the two play tug of war over the operations/property. It has been reported that workers have been witnessed throwing rocks and burning tires as they attempt to increase the attention given to the alleged mistreatment of the workers who farm millions of dollars worth of produce including strawberries and tomatoes in Baja. While the dispute was escalating, workers on strike blocked the main north-south highway and the Transpeninsular Highway. It’s also notable that additional strikes are breaking out in the surrounding area.

Workers are on strike demanding overtime pay, health care, water, breaks and time off. They also seek an end of arbitrary firings, and other abuses including sexual abuse. Workers (who are typically paid $8-10 per day) are requesting an increase to $20/day for long days in the sun or hothouse.

The farmers are being urged to return to work before the destruction of the crops leads to a destruction of jobs. Many could be affected by the ripple effect this would have on the region’s economy. During the course of the strike, over 200 protestors have been arrested for various activities including: riots, vandalism, rock-throwing, etc. To protect themselves and their livelihoods, businesses have boarded up their windows. More than 1,000 police officers have been dispersed throughout Baja, California area to control the situation.

If you are looking for information on hostile workplace conditions, contact the southern California employment law experts at Blumenthal, Nordrehaug & Bhowmik.