On behalf of current and former Benihana chefs, a former chef has filed an action under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) alleging that the company forced chefs to work off the clock without compensation, illegally deducted from the chefs’ tips to provide tips to employees not entitled to share them and harassed or fired the chefs if they complained about the practices. Kim v. Benihana Nat’l Corp., No. 13-62061 (S.D. Fla., filed September 20, 2013). Alleging unpaid overtime or minimum wages in the alternative, illegal tip deductions and retaliation, the plaintiff seeks an order requiring notice to all Benihana chefs, declaratory relief, damages, interest, attorney’s fees, and costs.
Tag Archives labor
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has filed a complaint against Performance Food Group, Inc., alleging that it had a “standard operating procedure of denying employment to female applicants for operative positions in its [warehouse] facilities on the basis of their gender”; EEOC also alleges that the defendant failed to promote a woman at its Maryland facility on the basis of her gender. EEOC v. Performance Food Group, Inc., No. 13-1712 (D. Md., filed June 13, 2013). The defendant apparently distributes food-related products to more than 130,000 independent and national chain restaurants, theaters, schools, hotels, health care facilities, and other institutions across the United States. According to the complaint, the defendant unlawfully discriminated against hiring women at multiple facilities since at least January 1, 2004, for warehouse positions that required the operation of machinery and factory-related processing equipment or were supervisory occupations. A corporate senior vice president allegedly stated on…
A former non-exempt Anheuser-Busch brewery worker in California has filed a putative class action against the company alleging that it violated the state labor code by failing to include the value of free or discounted beer—termed “incentive pay”—in employees’ regular pay rates and thus undercompensated them by calculating overtime pay on the basis of pay rates that were too low. Controulis v. Anheuser-Busch, LLC, No. BC518518 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., filed August 16, 2013). The plaintiff also claims that the company failed to timely provide a final paycheck when employees were discharged or quit. According to the complaint, the plaintiff was terminated during the year preceding the complaint’s filing while he was on a leave of absence. Seeking to certify several classes of California employees, the plaintiff alleges failure to pay overtime wages, wage statement violations, waiting time penalties, unfair competition (that is, by underpaying its employees, the…
According to a news source, restaurant chain T.G.I. Friday’s has agreed to make leave-policy changes affecting the employees working at its 272 company-owned facilities. The U.S. Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division apparently discovered violations of the federal Family and Medical Leave Act during an investigation of a company restaurant in Shreveport, Louisiana. The company had reportedly failed to reinstate an employee who took a legal leave under the law to the same or an equivalent position at the same pay and benefits, and had not allowed the employee to return immediately. The Labor Department determined that the restaurant owed the employee three weeks of lost wages. See The Kansas City Star, August 7, 2013.
According to a news source, upscale Rodeo Drive sushi restaurant Urasawa has been sued by former employees who claim they were forbidden from taking breaks and were not paid the overtime they worked. Apparently, a California Labor Department investigation has confirmed the complaints targeting chef and owner, Hiroyuki Urasawa, whose menu includes dishes served with caviar and 24-karat gold flakes and can cost a couple in excess of $1,000. Among those seeking back wages is Heriberto Zamora, who was reportedly forced to buy his own $700 set of knives when he was earning just $9 per hour. Zamora claims he was fired nine hours into his shift when he asked to go home with a fever and cough. See The New York Times, July 20, 2013.
Answering two of the questions certified to it by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, New York’s high court has determined that Starbucks Corp. can, under the state’s Labor Law, distinguish among its employees for purposes of sharing the tips customers leave in a jar on the counter. Barenboim v. Starbucks Corp., Winans v. Starbucks Corp., No. 122 (N.Y., decided June 26, 2013). Starbucks’ policy requires the distribution of pooled tips to baristas and shift supervisors. Both classes of employees spend most of their time performing customer-oriented services, such as taking orders, making and serving beverages and food, operating the cash register, cleaning tables, and stocking products. Both also work part-time and are paid hourly. Shift supervisors have minor supervisory responsibilities. Starbucks does not allow assistant store managers or store managers to receive any of the pooled tips. Both classes work full-time and are eligible for bonuses and benefits, such as…
A California resident who worked at a TGI Fridays in Los Angeles has filed a putative class action on behalf of a statewide class of current and former nonexempt employees, alleging that the restaurant failed to pay them (i) when they showed up for their shifts but were told to go home due to light customer traffic, (ii) for the time they spent in mandatory meetings, and (iii) all the wages and other compensation due upon their discharge, termination or separation “either timely or fully.” Portillo v. TGI Fridays, Inc., No. BC12119 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., filed June 14, 2013). Alleging causes of action for failure to pay reporting time, waiting time damages, and unfair, unlawful or deceptive business practices, the plaintiff seeks compensatory and liquidated damages, interest, injunctive relief, attorney’s fees, and costs.
Women who worked at celebrity chef Gordon Ramsay’s Los Angeles restaurant, The Fat Cow, have filed a putative class action on behalf of all nonexempt employees against the restaurant and his company, alleging they were denied meal and rest breaks, were not compensated for the missed breaks, were not compensated for overtime, were not paid minimum wage, were not provided with timely and accurate wage-and-hour statements, did not promptly receive accrued wages when they left the job, and did not receive all of the gratuities contributed to a tip pool, which they claim the defendants improperly converted. Becerra v. The Fat Cow LLC, No. BC511953 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., filed June 13, 2013). The named plaintiffs include two former hostesses, a server and a barista. They seek economic damages, injunctive relief, restitution, the imposition of civil penalties, punitive damages, interest, attorney’s fees, and costs.
A salesman has reportedly filed a discrimination lawsuit against his former employer in a New York state court alleging that the employer, who had invited the salesman to return to his job in a frame shop, asked him to leave when he saw how much weight the salesman had gained since leaving the shop in 2008. Bogadanove v. Frame It In Brooklyn, No. ___ (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Kings Cty., filing date n/a). According to the complaint, former employer Jerry Greenberg took one look at Seth Bogadanove on his return and said “Oh my God, what happened to you, you got so fat!” When Bogadanove attempted to explain that medication he was taking caused the weight gain, Greenberg allegedly said, “Oh my God, I am so sorry, I can’t use you, there is no way you can work here at your size. You wouldn’t fit between the aisles.” Bogadanove then purportedly…
A federal court in California has preliminarily approved a $3 million settlement of claims by state Starbucks Corp. employees that the company denied them off-duty breaks because its busy stores were understaffed and the company required employees to take their breaks on-duty if only two employees were present. York v. Starbucks Corp., No. 08-7919 (C.D. Cal., order entered June 10, 2013). According to a news source, the court expressed some reservations about the incentive awards to the named plaintiffs, noting that the Ninth Circuit “seems to be taking an evermore-aggressive look at incentive awards and expecting the trial court to look closely at those things.” Additional information about the settlement appears in Issue 484 of this Update. See Law360, June 10, 2013.
