In a unanimous vote, the California Senate has voted to repeal a new provision in the health code requiring restaurant workers to wear gloves when handling food. The provision took effect in January 2014 throughout California with a compliance grace period set to end in July 2014. The measure was intended to curb foodborne illness, but restaurant industry workers petitioned to repeal the provision, arguing that hand washing is as effective as wearing gloves without the added financial or environmental cost. They also suggested that gloves would add a false sense of security because, according to a study conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, gloved workers were less likely than ungloved workers to wash their hands when they should. Assemblyman Richard Pan (D-Sacramento), author of the bill to repeal the provision, was quoted as saying, “It is the industry standard in restaurants to prioritize cleanliness when handling food,…
Tag Archives restaurant
The sale of hot dogs described as “Kosher Style” by Five Guys Enterprises LLC may violate a Washington state law that describes what food products may be labeled kosher, according to a blogger for George Washington Law Professor Jonathan Turley’s blog. Darren Smith, a former deputy sheriff in Washington, writes that Five Guys advertises one of its products as a “Kosher Style” hot dog because, according to the company’s website, “the dogs are cooked on the same grill as our burgers,” even though “the way we cook them and serve them is not [kosher].” This label may violate Washington’s RCW 69.90.020(1), which states, “No person may knowingly sell or offer for sale any food product represented as ‘kosher’ or ‘kosher style’ when that person knows that the food product is not kosher and when the representation is likely to cause a prospective purchaser to believe that it is kosher,” with…
P.F. Chang’s China Bistro Inc. is investigating a potential data breach that may have exposed thousands of customers’ credit and debit card data. After contacting banks to determine commonly visited locations, a cybersecurity blogger reported that the data of customers who visited P.F. Chang’s between March 2014 and May 19, 2014, has been offered for sale on an underground Website known for selling data resulting from the Target breach in late 2013. While the source of the potential breach remains unknown, experts suggest that thieves planted malware onto the point-of-sale systems that employees use to run customer’s credit cards because similar malware was used to steal credit and debit card information from other retailers. See USA Today, June 11, 2014. Issue 526
A wheelchair-bound plaintiff has reportedly filed a putative class action in California state court against the largest franchisee of TGI Friday’s, Briad Restaurant Group LLC, for alleged violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Hicks v. Briad Restaurants Grp. LLC, No. BC546927 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., filed May 28, 2014). Plaintiff, Chris Hicks, alleges that Briad Restaurant violated the ADA by having deficient bathroom facilities and insufficient signage for disabled parking spaces in at least 20 of its locations, and he further asserts that the company had received notice of the issues, was given an opportunity to fix them and failed to do so. As a result, Hicks argues that Briad Restaurant has violated the Unruh Civil Rights Act and the California Disabled Persons Act and seeks statutory relief and injunctive damages. See Law360, May 29, 2014 Issue 525
A California state trial court has approved the settlement agreement in a class action against Innovative Dining Group LLC (IDG), owner of the Boa Steakhouse and Sushi Roku chains, alleging that the restaurants falsely advertised their menu as containing Kobe beef. Hall v. Innovative Dining Grp. LLC, No. BC493144 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., motion granted May 30, 2014). Plaintiffs claimed that using the term “Kobe beef” implies that the beef came from Wagyu cattle raised and slaughtered in the Kobe region of Japan, but IDG’s restaurants advertised Kobe beef on their menus even while the U.S. Department of Agriculture banned beef imports from that region from May 2010 to August 2012. While admitting no wrongdoing, IDG has agreed to issue $20 gift certificates to customers who can prove that they purchased a Kobe beef menu item, $10 gift certificates to any class member who submits a claim, and…
In response to Affordable Care Act provisions, requiring restaurants and similar retail food establishments to provide calorie and other nutrition information for menu items, U.S. Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) and a bipartisan group of senators have reportedly requested that the Office of Budget and Management (OMB) review nutrition labeling regulations to “ensure that any measures adopted will allow flexibility for restaurants and avoid unnecessarily burdening food retail establishments where nutrition information is already prevalent.” “Since FDA published its proposed rule to implement nutrition labeling of standard menu items at chain restaurants, many concerns have been raised about the regulations expanding to non-restaurants, such as grocery and convenience stores, where the vast majority of food products are already labeled with nutritional information,” wrote the senators in a May 30, 2014, letter to OMB Administrator Howard Shelanski. “The proposed rule also could affect restaurants with highly variable items or different food service…
A Papa John’s customer has filed a putative class action against the pizza company in Illinois state court, alleging that the chain illegally charges sales tax on delivery fees, resulting in each delivery customer overpaying by $0.16. Zucker v. Papa John’s Int’l, Inc, No. 14-668 (Madison Cty. Ct., filed May 5, 2014). Zachary Tucker argues that Illinois sales tax may be imposed only on the total sales price of tangible property, excluding the delivery fee, so long as the actual cost of delivery is less than the amount of the delivery fee. As a result, the complaint alleges, Papa John’s has violated and continues to violate the Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act (UDTPA), an Illinois consumer protection statute. In addition to class certification, Tucker seeks a cease-and-desist ruling to prevent Papa John’s from continuing to charge sales tax on delivery fees in Illinois, as well as damages for negligence, breach of…
CNNMoney has published a May 1, 2014, article claiming that the Department of Labor (DOL) has difficulty cracking down on labor and wage violations in the fast food industry due to the franchise model. Based on data collected by DOL’s Wage and Hour Division that reportedly found individual Subway franchisees “in violation of pay and hour rules in more than 1,100 investigations spanning from 2000 to 2013,” the article claims that these cases amounted to “17,000 Fair Labor Standards Act violations and resulted in franchisees having to reimburse Subway workers more than $3.8 million over the years.” “Even though fast food locations may look the same and restaurants abide by similar branding and business guidelines, each franchise owner is treated essentially as a small business,” opines CNNMoney’s Annalyn Kurtz. “Meanwhile, the corporate parents can distance themselves from being found liable of labor violations.” In addition to DOL’s renewed focus on…
Four former employees of T.G.I. Friday’s, Inc. have filed a putative class action against the restaurant and its parent company, Carlson Restaurants, Inc., to recover unpaid wages, including overtime compensation and unlawful deductions. Flood v. Carlson Restaurants Inc., No. 14-2740 (S.D.N.Y., filed April 17, 2014). The former employees claim that T.G.I. Friday’s managers required them to work in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law. In the complaint, the employees allege that managers required tip-earning workers to do “side work” like rolling silverware, cleaning the restaurant and other tasks that did not merit them tips while the restaurant paid them at the reduced minimum wage reserved for tipped workers. They further allege that managers prevented the employees from receiving their earned overtime pay by lowering the amount of time the employees were on the clock each week to below 40 hours and that the restaurant…
A federal court in California has refused to certify four classes of Starbucks employees in litigation alleging that its rest break policy and scheduling practices, and meal period policy and practices violated the state’s Labor Code and Unfair Competition Law. Cummings v. Starbucks Corp., No. 12-6345 (C.D. Cal., decided March 24, 2014). As to the proposed meal break class, the court found that the plaintiff’s “second theory of liability—that Starbucks had a practice of failing to provide timely meal breaks—does not present a common question of law” because “there is no common answer as to why employees took a late meal break, and individualized inquiries into each late meal break would be required.” The court also found as to this proposed class that the plaintiff’s claims did not meet the typicality requirement because her alleged late meal break claims were due not to a defective policy, but “because of unique…
