207 results for 'cat:"Employment" AND cat:"Class Action"'.
J. Seeborg grants preliminary approval to a class action settlement in a dispute over allegedly unpaid wages between a class of employees and their employer. The settlement, with a net amount of $44,040,833.33, appears fair, adequate and reasonable. Minor modifications to the class definitions, namely expanding the class period through the date of preliminary approval and a change to the definition of the class of hourly employees to specify that it includes all retail employees, do not meaningfully change this analysis.
Court: USDC Northern District of California, Judge: Seeborg, Filed On: July 28, 2023, Case #: 3:16cv1854, NOS: Other Labor Litigation - Labor, Categories: employment, Settlements, class Action
J. Rice denies the delivery drivers' motion for conditional class certification, ruling the lack of evidence FedEx had any control over their employment with third-party intermediary companies prevents the drivers from being grouped together as a class, especially considering FedEx did not pay them and did not have the authority to fire them.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Rice, Filed On: July 25, 2023, Case #: 3:20cv346, NOS: Fair Labor Standards Act - Labor, Categories: employment, class Action, Labor
J. Menetrez finds that the trial court erred in denying class certification of an employee's inadequate wage statement claims, as well as granting summary judgment to her employer on Private Attorneys General Act wage and rest period claims. Her time card rounding claims should have also survived. However, the trial court properly found that the employer's use of an alternative workweek schedule was not voided by its failure to make certain disclosures prior to an employee election on the schedule since the employer did not omit material information about the effects of the proposed schedule. Reversed in part.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Menetrez, Filed On: July 24, 2023, Case #: E072704, Categories: employment, class Action
J. Gorton partially allows the call center agents' motion for conditional certification of the putative collective in a suit against their employer for failure to pay them properly. The class can't be all of the call center agents who worked under the employer in question during a certain interval of time; it has to be narrowed to "All current and former hourly call center agents who worked for Liberty Mutual Group, Inc. and were assigned to its New Castle, Pennsylvania office at any time during the past three years."
Court: USDC Massachusetts, Judge: Gorton, Filed On: July 21, 2023, Case #: 1:22cv11687, NOS: Fair Labor Standards Act - Labor, Categories: employment, class Action
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Aiken grants preliminary approval of a $7.35 million settlement in the hourly employees' class action accusing the health care company of unlawfully time-rounding the employees' work hours to pay them less. The net settlement fund amounts to approximately 54% of the employees' allegedly lost wages. Class members' settlement payments will be calculated proportionally based on each member's net time clock calculation.
Court: USDC Oregon, Judge: Aiken, Filed On: July 17, 2023, Case #: 6:21cv825, NOS: Other Labor Litigation - Labor, Categories: employment, Settlements, class Action
J. Boardman grants a car dealership its motion to compel arbitration in this class action suit brought by former staff for alleged wage law violations. The class claims the dealership manipulated numbers to justify not paying class members their true commissions. However, class members also entered an arbitration agreement with the dealership upon hire, so they are not entitled to a jury trial.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Boardman, Filed On: July 14, 2023, Case #: 8:22cv2312, NOS: Other Statutory Actions - Other Suits, Categories: Arbitration, employment, class Action
J. Gwin grants the employer's motion to dismiss, ruling current employees initially denied religious exemptions to the Covid-19 vaccine mandate lack standing because they were granted exemptions before the suit was filed and, therefore, have not shown the threat of an imminent injury. Meanwhile, those former employees who claim they were constructively discharged after initially being denied exemptions also lack standing because they have not shown disparate treatment or disciplinary actions taken because of their religious beliefs, but rather, they left voluntarily before the adjudication of their requests for exemptions.
Court: USDC Northern District of Ohio, Judge: Gwin, Filed On: July 12, 2023, Case #: 1:22cv2154, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Covid-19, employment Discrimination, class Action
J. Rice partially grants class certification for the package driver's claim that UPS did not comply with the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act when it did not compensate his short-term leaves, which he took as part of his obligations to the Army Reserve. The driver sufficiently identifies common questions of law and fact involving himself and other package drivers, such as how non-military leave is not comparable to military leave under USERRA for those who require it.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Washington, Judge: Rice, Filed On: July 5, 2023, Case #: 2:21cv114, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: employment Discrimination, Military, class Action
J. Frimpong preliminarily certifies one of three proposed classes and equitably tolls the statute of limitations for opt-in plaintiffs in part, starting from December 12, 2022, regarding a county employee's allegations of violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act. The employee has provided "sufficient evidence for preliminary certification of the unpaid overtime wage class prior to extensive discovery." For opt-in plaintiffs, "it is appropriate to toll the statute of limitations for the period of time that this preliminary certification Motion has been pending."
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Frimpong, Filed On: July 3, 2023, Case #: 2:21cv2623, NOS: Fair Labor Standards Act - Labor, Categories: employment, class Action
J. Clark grants conditional certification to a class of employees who claim the company deducted 30 minutes of pay each shift for a meal break regardless of whether or not they took a meal break. Declarations from seven different employees describes identical treatment in terms of how the company managed their required breaks, including allegations that supervisors discouraged employees from filing no-meal break reports.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Missouri, Judge: Clark, Filed On: June 29, 2023, Case #: 4:22cv569, NOS: Fair Labor Standards Act - Labor, Categories: employment, class Action
J. Douglas finds the district court properly allowed this suit alleging violations of the FLSA’s overtime provision to proceed as a class action against the speech, physical and occupational therapy organization. The court applied all proper legal standards, and its factual findings were not clearly erroneous. It would have been inconsistent with the FLSA to require many separate trials. The employer was not prevented from defending the case, nor did any lack of fairness arise by allowing the class action. Affirmed.
Court: 5th Circuit, Judge: Douglas, Filed On: June 21, 2023, Case #: 22-40411, Categories: Civil Rights, employment, class Action
J. Pepper denies the employee's renewed but incomplete motion for class certification in his lawsuit against the produce company disputing nonpayment for work done during meal breaks of less than 30 minutes. In addition to denying the company's motion to reconsider a previous ruling on class certification and ordering the employee to file another certification motion following all applicable court rules, the employee's motion for summary judgment is denied and a new briefing schedule is established to allow him and the company to file revised briefs taking into account a recent Seventh Circuit decision dealing with similar issues of payment and meal breaks. Both parties are also admonished to stop bringing superfluous motions asking to file sur-reply briefs or to strike other filings, as they are clogging up the docket and will not be granted.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Wisconsin, Judge: Pepper, Filed On: June 19, 2023, Case #: 2:20cv1802, NOS: Fair Labor Standards Act - Labor, Categories: employment, class Action, Labor
J. Joseph finds partially in favor of the dancers in their class action lawsuit against the strip club and its owners bringing multiple claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act, including for failure to pay minimum wage and forced tip sharing. The dancers' motion for partial summary judgment is granted as to whether the club and owners misclassified them as independent contractors instead of employees, which is supported by the "economic reality" of their relationship with their employer. The strip club and owners' motion for summary judgment is granted as to the merits of the dancers' wage claims since, as a matter of law, they are not entitled to individual coverage because they are not "engaged in commerce" under the Act's terms, and the club is also not covered by the Act's enterprise coverage, regardless of whether it frequently serves out-of-state patrons. Given these findings, the case is dismissed.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Wisconsin, Judge: Joseph, Filed On: June 14, 2023, Case #: 2:21cv753, NOS: Fair Labor Standards Act - Labor, Categories: employment, class Action, Labor
J. Kennelly denies a group of Black former Chicago city workers’ motion to certify a class. The workers, all formerly employees of the City of Chicago Department of Water Management, claim they were subject to the department’s widespread culture of racism and sexism. However, the court opines that the workers’ allegations and reported individual experiences are too diverse to qualify as a coherent class with claims in common. The court similarly finds that the workers have not shown that their employers acted in an organized way to mete out racist treatment.
Court: USDC Northern District of Illinois, Judge: Kennelly, Filed On: June 6, 2023, Case #: 1:17cv4858, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: employment Discrimination, class Action, employment Retaliation
J. Wright denies an employee's motion for the preliminary approval of class action and PAGA settlement in an employment dispute. The employee and employer reached a settlement, however "the parties’ treatment of the class claims throughout this matter has been questionable, including at the settlement stage." The employee requested that the court dismiss class claims, which it did. Then the employee sought to reassert class allegations solely for the purpose of settlement, but the parties have not addressed why they are settling class claims where no class allegations are at issue and the employer has not shown why it would agree to the reinstatement of class claims. "These contradictory actions by the parties are indicative of collusion."
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Wright, Filed On: June 1, 2023, Case #: 2:19cv5050, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: employment, class Action
J. Schroeder finds that the district court properly ruled in favor of produce distributors after a bench trial concerning the application of a California labor law enacted to protect workers whose labor has been outsourced to a labor provider. Under a statute of California Labor Code, an outsourcing entity, known as a “client employer,” is liable for the laborers’ wages if the laborers’ work is within the outsourcers’ “usual course of business.” Strawberry pickers sought to hold strawberry growers liable for their wages as “client employers.” In 2018, the growers stopped paying the pickers and later filed for bankruptcy. The strawberry pickers were not performing labor within the “usual course of business” as defined by the statute. Affirmed.
Court: 9th Circuit, Judge: Schroeder, Filed On: June 1, 2023, Case #: 22-55119, Categories: Agriculture, employment, class Action