Former Employees Sue Bravo Stars Lisa Vanderpump and Ken Todd for Wage & Hour Violations

Former Employees Sue Bravo Stars Lisa Vanderpump and Ken Todd for Wage & Hour Violations.jpg

Lisa Vanderpump and Ken Todd’s restaurant empire is the foundation for a drama-filled Bravo series. Stars on the show, Vanderpump Rules, tend to be more than happy to participate in spite of the drama the show is known for creating. But recently, several former employees filed a lawsuit alleging that they were not provided proper wages.  

Bravo Stars Sued for Various Employment Law Violations:

Former employees claim that Bravo stars Lisa Vanderpump and Ken Todd failed to pay wages or overtime wages for four years (and maybe more). In December 2019, Adam Pierce Antoine, and several other former employees, filed a class-action lawsuit. The defendants, Lisa Vanderpump and Ken Todd own several California restaurants, including SUR, Tom Tom, Pump, and Villa Blanca. Allegedly, staffers at the Bravo stars’ restaurants were not compensated fairly when they worked overtime - as a standard practice. The plaintiffs also allege that the owner, Lisa Vanderpump, regularly dedicated time and energy to altering employee time records to manipulate the number of hours to minimize the number of hours rather than providing for all the hours worked. Not only does this represent wage and hour violations and overtime pay violations, but it also violates federal requirements to provide employees with an accurate wage statement.

Bravo Stars Allegedly Fail to Pay Employees for Hours Worked:

Allegedly, Lisa Vanderpump did not provide a minimum wage to her employees for their hours due to numerous standard “practices” that businesses can be tempted to institute as a means of minimizing labor costs.

  • Off the Clock Work: Employees were not paid for hours worked “off the clock.”

  • Unpaid Training: Employees were not paid for mandatory training.

  • Unpaid, but On Call: Employees were not paid for time spent on call.

  • No Meal or Rest Breaks: Employees were not provided with meal and rest breaks required by California labor law, and were not otherwise compensated. (According to labor law, Employees who are not given meal breaks or rest breaks should be compensated and allegedly, this never happened for employees at the many restaurants owned by the well-known Bravo stars).

In addition to wage and hour and overtime violations, Vanderpumpand Todd allegedly did not provide terminated employees with accurate wage statements reflecting the time they worked. Plaintiffs filed suit citing they suffered damages and Antione seeks more than $25,000. 

In response to the lawsuit, the restaurant describes the plaintiff as disgruntled workers who were written up and given plenty of warnings by their supervising staff before they were let go. The owners also insist that they take action to prevent abuse toward their staff or their patrons.

If you need to talk to someone about violations in the workplace or if you need to file an overtime lawsuit, get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in any one of various law firm offices located in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.

California Caterers Sue LA Airport for Unpaid Overtime

California Caterers Sue LA Airport for Unpaid Overtime.jpg

Caterers working at Los Angeles International Airport airlines filed suit against Sky Chefs in December 2019. The California workers claim they are owed hundreds of thousands of dollars in unpaid overtime.  Sky Chef workers allege they were shortchanged wages earned from January 1, 2019, throughout the entire year. The plaintiffs seek class-action certification. Sky Chef responded by advising those seeking information that they do not comment on pending litigation.

The employees filing suit claim that Sky Chefs uses a standard practice to calculate overtime for workers at LAX that bases overtime pay rates on a wage below the legally required minimum wage. The practice is described as “systematic, widespread, and flagrant” in the lawsuit. If the allegations are true, the employment law violations were both widespread and flagrant.

Examples of Alleged Employment Law Violations:

One plaintiff included in the lawsuit alleges that Sky Chefs failed to provide him full payment for overtime, underpaying him by $3.74 per hour for all overtime hours worked. The plaintiffs’ legal counsel estimates the number of affected Sky Chefs employees to be between 500 and 900 workers assigned to various facilities adjacent to LAX. Plaintiffs seek damages equal to their underpaid overtime hours plus interest, attorney’s fees, and costs. It is estimated to total at least a few million dollars.

The California Overtime Lawsuit Follows Living Wage and Affordable Health Care Protest:

The Sky Chefs California overtime lawsuit followed the protest staged by Sky Chef workers the month prior at the Los Angeles airport. The protest called for a living wage and affordable health care.

If you need to discuss how to file an overtime lawsuit, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in any one of various law firm offices located in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago. 

The Fight Over California’s Gig Economy Law Escalates: Drivers Sue Uber for Back Pay

The Fight Over California’s Gig Economy Law Escalates Drivers Sue Uber for Back Pay.jpg

A group of Uber drivers recently filed a class-action lawsuit. The lawsuit filed against Uber at the end of 2019 seeks retroactive pay, benefits, and overtime for Uber drivers. Pay, benefits, and overtime would be retroactive to April 2018, the time at which the Dynamex ruling was issued by the California Supreme Court that set new standards for when companies are expected to provide benefits to workers.

Uber Drivers Alleged Violations of Labor Law:

The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. In the suit, plaintiffs argue that Uber improperly classifies drivers as independent contractors instead of employees with access to employee benefits and employee protections. The legislation was signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom in September 2019 and codified the Supreme Court ruling into law. Assembly Bill 5 creates an ABC test for contractor-employee distinction based on three factors.

Uber Claims Their Practices Do Not Violate Labor Law:

When asked for a comment on the suit, Uber did not immediately respond, but later stated that they do not plan to make changes to their practices to comply with the law because they maintain their driver classifications are correct. Together with other gig economy powerhouses (Lyft, Doordash, etc.) Uber is also floating a ballot measure that could allow them to continue the practice of classifying drivers as independent contractors.

The suit names three dozen Uber drivers as representatives for current and former Uber employees. Class size is an estimated 50,000 to 75,000 drivers that opted out of arbitration clauses. The plaintiffs claim that drivers should be classified as employees and be eligible for minimum wage, overtime pay, mileage reimbursement, cell phone usage, and additional reimbursement for expenses.

AB 5 Increases Misclassification Lawsuits:

With AB 5 taking effect as of January 1, 2020, more lawsuits are expected throughout the year as workers learn about their newly granted rights. Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez, D-San Diego, championed AB 5 and also encouraged California attorneys to file lawsuits over misclassified employees.

In response to the drivers’ fight against the gig economy’s practice of classifying them as independent contractors, two other groups have sued in a challenge to the legal claims insisting that it would dramatically decrease their ability to earn a living.

If you need to talk to someone about misclassification or if you need to file a misclassification lawsuit, get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in any one of various law firm offices located in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.

$2.75 Million Goes to Temp Nurses in Overtime Case Settlement

9. $2.75 Million Goes to Temp Nurses in Overtime Case Settlement.jpg

In recent news, a group of temporary healthcare providers alleged overtime violations. After filing suit (Dalchau et al v. Fastaff, LLC, N.D. Cal., No. 3:17-cv-01584), and gaining class certification, the overtime class action lawsuit was settled. The class members will split about $1.6 million.

The nursing staff company that allegedly violated overtime regulations, will pay $2.75 million to settle the case. The collective action settlement won final approval from a California federal court. The class members include more than 2,750 nurses and technicians across the nation. The members allege that Fastaff LLC did not include housing stipends in their overtime calculations, which is in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and California labor law.

Defining Overtime Pay: Overtime pay is compensation paid to an employee who works more than “full time” hours as defined by federal labor law. The rate of overtime pay is calculated by multiplying the regular hourly rate of pay by 1.5. The amount of overtime pay provided to an employee is the overtime pay rate (as previously calculated) multiplied by the number of hours worked over 40 in one week or over 8 in one day.

$1.7 million of the settlement will be split amongst class and collective members, after necessary deductions. Each of the members will receive a payout of approximately $624.  

Lead plaintiffs in the case, Stephanie Dalchau and Michael Goodwin, will receive $10,000 service awards. Counsel will receive $916,000 in attorneys’ fees and $27,700 for reimbursed litigation costs. The hybrid settlement is seen as fair, reasonable, and adequate by Judge William H. Orrick of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The settlement was granted preliminary approval May 12th, 2019. Orrick determined that appropriate notice was issued to putative class members and no objections were made to the terms of the settlement.

If you are not being paid overtime or if you need to file an overtime lawsuit, we can help. Get in contact with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in any one of various law firm offices located in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.

Delta Overtime Lawsuit Settled for $3.5 Million

8. Delta Overtime Lawsuit Settled for $3.5 Million.jpg

In recent news, Delta Airlines agreed to pay $3.5 million to settle a class action lawsuit including approximately 3,300 former and current Delta employees (Fan v. Delta Air Lines, Inc.). The settlement agreement settles a number of claims made against the airlines including overtime pay violations.

 According to the class action lawsuit, Delta Airlines failed to provide employees with overtime payment as required by California labor law. The employees’ claims were focused around a complicated pay formula that included profit-sharing payments, shift differential pay, non-discretionary bonuses, and the fair market value of employee travel passes.

The Delta overtime lawsuit is a good example of two types of California overtime cases/disputes that have been common recently: 1) claims focused on how hours are counted, and 2) claims focused on how the “regular rate of pay” is determined. The suit also serves as a reminder to employees to check their overtime calculations. Workers should periodically check both elements to ensure they are receiving all the overtime pay they are due. 

Howard Fan, plaintiff, worked customer service for Delta Airlines at the Los Angeles International Airport from September 2010 to August 2018. During his employment with Delta customer service, he regularly paid shift differentials to employees for each hour worked during afternoon and evening shifts. Delta Airlines also provided additional compensation through the company’s incentive program called Shared Rewards. The Shared Rewards program allowed workers to earn cash bonuses if company-wide operations met or exceeded agreed upon goals and metrics in various areas: baggage handling, percentage of scheduled flights that were successfully completed each month, and on-time arrivals. Cash bonuses through Shared Rewards were distributed to employees monthly and were included on wage statements in the pay period during which they were paid. Class members also received compensation from Delta through the profit-sharing plan, and additional compensation in the form of travel pass privileges (Travel Companion Passes for free or reduced-fare travel).

However, shift differentials, incentive program payments, profit-sharing contributions, and the taxable value of any travel passes, were not included when calculating the employees’ regular rate of pay that was used as the basis for overtime pay calculations. According to California law mirroring the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), the “regular rate of pay” includes “all remuneration for employment paid to, or on behalf of, and employee.” Employees in the case argued that Delta was violating labor law by failing to include all compensation provided to employees into their regular rate of pay.

If you need to discuss violations of overtime pay requirements or if you need to file an overtime lawsuit, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in any one of various law firm offices located in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.

Ex-Dancer Sues Strip Club for Misclassification

_Ex-Dancer Sues Strip Club for Misclassification.jpg

The misclassification controversy is not exclusive to the gig economy. As the gig economy’s problems seem to escalate, problems are growing in other industries as well. In Daytona Beach, a former dancer at Grandview Live is suing the strip club claiming they owe her back wages because they misclassified her as an independent contractor when she was allegedly an employee.

Brittany Hall, former dancer at Grandview Live in Daytona Beach, claims that due to the club’s misclassification, she allegedly earned less than minimum wage and was not paid overtime. Hall, like the other exotic dancers at the club, was paid strictly in tips from customers. She worked at the strip club for over two years without overtime and receiving less than minimum wage, which attorneys for the plaintiff claim is fairly standard in the industry.

Hall claims Grandview Live owes her money because they violated wage and hour law by paying her less than minimum wage and failed to pay her overtime hours she was due. Hall also alleges that the club took tips from her in addition to their other employment law violations.

California legislature recently passed Assembly Bill 5 which will require companies to treat their workers as employees if they meet certain standards. The bill is set to go into effect January 1, 2020 and will have a massive impact on gig economy companies like Uber and Lyft and DoorDash. But it will also benefit workers like Brittany Hall, working in industries that have been around since before smartphones and apps were introduced.

Sometimes employers misclassify workers unintentionally. In some cases, it is an honest mistake. Other employers actively and purposefully misclassify their employees in order to maximize profits and minimize costs. Employers have major incentives to shift workers off their payrolls due to taxes, unemployment insurance, workers compensation premiums, etc.

If you are misclassified or if you are not being paid overtime wages for all your hours worked, please do not delay. Get in touch with one of the experienced employment law attorneys at Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP so we can help.

Quick Dispense, Inc. Faces Allegations of PAGA Violations

Quick Dispense, Inc. Faces Allegations of PAGA Violations.jpg

A Los Angeles employment lawsuit alleges that Quick Dispense, Inc. violated California labor law by failing to pay non-exempt California employees overtime wages as well as failing to offer legally required rest and meal breaks. Employment law attorneys at Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP filed the class action lawsuit in September 2019. The class action lawsuit alleges PAGA violations and failure to accurately calculate overtime wages. The lawsuit is pending in LA County Superior Court (Case No. 19STCV29405).

According to the California class action, Quick Dispense, Inc. violated numerous labor laws by:

1.    Failing to provide non-exempt employees with fair payment for all hours worked

2.    Failing to provide non-exempt employees with accurate overtime wages

3.    Failing to provide legally required meal and rest breaks

4.    Failing to provide employees itemized wage statements with accurate listings of hours and wages

5.    Failing to provide payment of wages in a timely manner

6.    Failing to pay minimum wage

7.    Failing to reimburse employees for necessary business expenses

PAGA (the Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act) authorizes aggrieved employees to file lawsuits to seek recovery of civil penalties on behalf of themselves, other employees and the state in response to Labor Code violations. PAGA enables California to enforce state labor laws by allowing the employee experiencing the violation to file suit to recover civil penalties as an act of protecting the public from companies and entities in violation of employment law.

If you need more information about filing a class action lawsuit in California or if you have questions about what an experienced employment law attorney can do for you, please get in touch with one of Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP’s offices in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside or Chicago.