Class Action & Impact Litigation

"New York's Outten & Golden is famed in the market for its successful advice on class actions. Discrimination claims, and wage and hour issues form just a portion of the cases it undertakes against corporate giants like MetLife and Wal-Mart."

Chambers & Partners USA 2004

Class action and impact litigation are potent tools for curbing employer abuses from economic exploitation to gender-based glass ceilings. Through our class-based litigation efforts, we have obtained well in excess of $100,000,000 in back wages, together with substantial injunctive relief and other benefits on behalf of tens of thousands of workers throughout the United States. Currently, we are actively working on systemic discrimination class actmagions against major employers – such as Smith Barney and Morgan Stanley – as well as litigating nationwide overtime class actions in courts in New York and California.

Just Filed

Mario Batali, Joseph Bastianisch, Babbo Ristorante e Enoteca, Bar Jamon, Casa Mono, Del Posto, Esca, Lupa, OTTO Enoteca Pizzeria, The Spotted Pig, and Tarry Lodge – Tip Misappropriation, Minimum Wage, Overtime, Spread of Hours

On July 29, 2010, Outten & Golden LLP and their co-counsel, Joseph, Herzfeld, Hester & Kirschenbaum, filed amended class and collective action complaint against Mario Batali and Joseph Bastianich who own a restaurant empire that includes Babbo Ristorante e Enoteca, Bar Jamon, Casa Mono, Del Posto, Esca, Lupa, OTTO Enoteca Pizzeria, The Spotted Pig in New York City, and Tarry Lodge. The lawsuit seeks to recover minimum wages, overtime, misappropriated tips, and spread-of-hours pay for Plaintiffs and their similarly situated co-workers – hourly food service workers who have worked at the critically acclaimed restaurants owned by Defendants Mario Batali and Joseph Bastianich in New York.

The amended complaint alleges, among other things, that Mr. Batali, Mr. Bastianich, and their restaurants unlawfully confiscated a portion of their workers’ tips in order to supplement their own profits. Specifically, it alleges, at the end of every shift, instead of distributing customers’ credit card tips to the workers who earned them as the law requires, Mr. Batali, Mr. Bastianich, and their restaurants took from the tip pool an amount equal to approximately 4% or 4.5% of the restaurants’ wine sales (and sometimes other beverage sales) for the night and put it in their own pockets.

Please email Justin M. Swartz (jms@outtengolden.com), Rachel Bien (rmb@outtengolden.com) or Sonia Lin (slin@outtengolden.com, or call (212) 245-1000 for more information.

Return to Top

Artisanal and Terrence Brennan

On June 17, 2010, Outten & Golden LLP filed a putative class and collective action lawsuit against Terrence Brennan and his Artisanal restaurant claiming violations of federal and state wage and hours laws. The complaint alleges that Mr. Brennan and Artisanal engaged in improper tip-sharing practices by distributing portions of employees’ tips to non-tip eligible employees.

Please email Justin M. Swartz (jms@outtengolden.com), Rachel Bien (rmb@outtengolden.com) or Juno Turner (jturner@outtengolden.com), or call (212) 245-1000 for more information.

Return to Top

Bank of America and Merrill Lynch Gender Discrimination

Outten & Golden LLP and our co-counsel, Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP, represent three financial advisors who filed a national class action lawsuit on March 30, 2010 in federal court in Brooklyn. The suit charges that Bank of America and Merrill Lynch, which merged in late 2008 to form the nation’s largest bank and brokerage firm, engaged in sex discrimination against female stock brokers. The Plaintiffs seek to represent a class consisting of all female Financial Advisors employed by Bank of America or Merrill Lynch during the relevant period. If certified, the lawsuit would be the largest gender discrimination class action on behalf of female brokers.

The case, Calibuso, et al. v. Bank of America Corp., et al., No. 10 Civ. 1413, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, charges that Bank of America and Merrill Lynch have engaged in a pattern and practice of gender discrimination against female financial advisors with respect to business opportunities, compensation, professional support, and other terms and conditions of employment. The women allege that Merrill Lynch, a wholly owned subsidiary of Bank of America, discriminates against female Financial Advisors in account distributions; partnership opportunities; upfront money, pay-out rate, and other benefits in its compensation plan; as well as in other opportunities for brokers to increase their income. The complaint alleges violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and New York and Florida anti-discrimination laws.

People interested in the lawsuit may provide information by visiting: www.bofagenderlawsuit.com, or calling 1-888-886-9359 to leave a message for plaintiffs’ counsel. They can also contact Adam T. Klein or Cara Greene at (212) 245-1000 for more information.

Return to Top

Waldorf-Astoria/Hilton Tip Violations

On February 25, 2010, Outten & Golden filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of banquet waiters, alleging that the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel’s management and Hilton Worldwide, Inc. violated state labor laws. The plaintiffs allege that the Waldorf-Astoria skimmed gratuities that customers were led to believe were “service charge” gratuities to be paid in their entirety to the service staff. The plaintiffs also allege that the Waldorf-Astoria withheld special banquet gratuities that customers intended to be paid to banquet waiters for excellent service.

Banquet waiters who have worked at the hotel’s private dining events since February 25, 2004 may be eligible to be part of the lawsuit.

Outten & Golden LLP is currently investigating reports of similar practices at other New York City hotels and restaurants.

Please email Justin M. Swartz (jms@outtengolden.com) or Molly A. Brooks (mbrooks@outtengolden.com) or call (212) 245-1000 for more information.

Return to Top

Washington Mutual (WaMu) Overtime Class Action

Outten & Golden LLP has filed a nationwide class action lawsuit against Washington Mutual Bank ("WaMu") alleging that WaMu failed to pay its underwriters overtime pay as required by the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and NY state law. The case is called Aber-Shukofsky et al. v. JPMorgan Chases & Co et al., No. 10 Civ. 00226, and it is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York. The plaintiffs are former underwriters who allege that they were deliberately misclassified as FSLA exempt so that WaMu could avoid paying them overtime compensation as required by law. The plaintiffs worked well in excess of 40 hours a week and received no overtime pay. Underwriters from California, Illinois, New York, and Washington have already joined the lawsuit.

Please email Jack A. Raisner (jar@outtengolden.com) or Lauren Schwartzreich (les@outtengolden.com) or call (212) 245-1000 for more information.

Return to Top

Penthouse Executive Club Dancers - Tip Misappropriation, Unlawful House Fees, and Minimum Wage and Overtime Case

On February 11, 2010, Outten & Golden LLP and the Sex Workers Project of the Urban Justice Center filed a class action lawsuit against the Penthouse Executive Club and its owners Robert Gans and Mark Yackow on behalf of entertainers (dancers) who have worked at the club between February 11, 2006 and the present.

The lawsuit alleges that the Penthouse Executive Club regularly deprived entertainers of their rights under federal and New York State wage and hour laws, including their right to be paid proper minimum wages, their right to be paid proper overtime compensation, their right to keep customer gratuities they earn, their right to be reimbursed for uniform expenses, and their right to work without paying “house fees.”

The lawsuit seeks to recover on behalf of Penthouse Executive Club entertainers all of the wages they have earned, all of their confiscated tips, and all of the fees they were forced to pay, as federal and state law require.

Outten & Golden LLP and the Sex Workers Project of the Urban Justice Center are currently investigating reports of similar practices at other New York City adult nightclubs. Outten & Golden LLP currently represents more than 70 dancers who worked at Scores in Diaz v. Scores Holding Co., No. 07 Civ. 8718 (S.D.N.Y.)

As outlined in the Penthouse Executive Club complaint, the Penthouse Executive Club and other clubs in the adult entertainment industry, in New York City and across the country, frequently classify exotic dancers as independent contractors and disregard their basic wage and hour and other employment rights. These entertainers work in an unorganized industry characterized by wide disparities in bargaining power between workers and club owners. As a result, clubs like the Penthouse Executive Club are well positioned to take advantage of exotic dancers and deny them their rights as workers.

The Complaint explains that, over the years, entertainers at adult clubs like the Penthouse Executive Club have made some strides by winning recognition as employees and otherwise protecting their workplace rights, including in cases prosecuted by the United States Department of Labor. See, e.g., Reich v. Circle C Invs., 998 F.2d 324, 326-29 (5th Cir. 1993) (upholding trial court’s determination that adult club dancers are employees within the meaning of the Fair Labor Standards Act); Diaz v. Scores Holding Co., No. 07 Civ. 8718, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 38248, at *6 (S.D.N.Y. May 9, 2008) (conditionally certifying Fair Labor Standards Act collective of entertainers and other workers at New York City adult night club and authorizing notice to putative members of the collective); Whiting v. W & R Corp., No. 2:03-0509, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34008, at *6-9 (S.D. W. Va. Apr. 18, 2005) (denying defendant’s motion for summary judgment in wage and hour case brought by dancer at exotic dance club); Harrell v. Diamond A Entm’t, Inc., 992 F. Supp. 1343, 1347–54 (M.D. Fla. 1997) (holding that dancer at adult night club was employee for purposes of the Fair Labor Standards Act); Reich v. Priba Corp., 890 F. Supp. 586, 594 (N.D. Tex. 1995) (after bench trial, finding dancers at adult night club were employees for purposes of the Fair Labor Standards Act in case brought by the Department of Labor); Donovan v. Tavern Talent & Placements, Inc., Civ. No. 84-F-401, 1986 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30955, at *6–7 (D. Colo. Jan. 8, 1986) (holding that night club operators employed dancers and violated their rights as tipped employees); Chaves v. King Arthur's Lounge, Inc., No. 07-2505, 2009 Mass. Super. LEXIS 298, at *19-20 (Mass. Super. Ct. July 30, 2009) (holding defendant bar/lounge misclassified exotic dancers as independent contractors under Massachusetts law); Smith v. Tyad, Inc., 209 P.3d 228, 231-34 (Mont. 2009) (upholding state wage enforcement agency’s finding that exotic dancers are employees and upholding agency’s authority to deem deduction of “stage fees” unlawful requiring reimbursement). See also Carrie Benson Fischer, Employee Rights in Sex Work: The Struggle for Dancers' Rights as Employees, 14 Law & Ineq. J. 521 (June 1996).

Nevertheless, the adult entertainment industry in New York City and elsewhere remains largely out of compliance with basic worker protection statutes. The Penthouse Executive Club, a leader in the industry, is no exception. It regularly deprives entertainers of their rights under federal and New York State wage and hour laws, including their right to be paid proper minimum wages, their right to be paid proper overtime compensation, their right to keep customer gratuities they earn, their right to be reimbursed for uniform expenses, and their right to work without paying “house fees.”

For more information, please email Justin Swartz (jms@outtengolden.com)or Sonia Lin (slin@outtengolden.com), or call (212) 245-1000.

Return to Top

Strip House Restaurant New York

On April 29, 2009, Outten & Golden LLP filed a putative class and collective action lawsuit in the Federal District Court for the Southern District of New York against The Glazier Group Inc.; T-Bone Restaurant, LLC a/k/a Strip House New York; Peter H. Glazier; Penny Glazier; and Mathew Glazier for violations of federal and state wage and hours laws. The violations include: engaging in improper tip-pooling practices; redistributing portions of employees’ tips to non-tip eligible employees; failing to pay proper overtime compensation to employees who worked more than 40 hours in a work week; failing to reimburse workers for the cost of purchasing and laundering required uniforms; and failing to pay workers the required minimum amount of call-in pay for all days on which they report for duty. The Plaintiff, a former Strip House server, is represented by Outten & Golden LLP and Fitapelli & Schaffer, LLP.

Please email Justin M. Swartz (jms@outtengolden.com) or Lauren Schwartzreich(les@outtengolden.com) or call (212) 245-1000 for more information.

Return to Top

Bovis Lend Lease

A federal lawsuit alleges that Bovis Lend Lease, Inc. and Bovis Lend Lease LMB, Inc., managers of many of New York City's famous construction projects, including the Mets' Citi Field and the 9/11 Memorial at Ground Zero, did not pay workers overtime wages in violation of the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), the New York Labor Law (NYLL), and the New Jersey Wage and Hour Law (NJWHL).

Renee Sewell, a former employee from Hoboken, N.J. who worked at Bovis' work sites in New York City and New Jersey, filed suit on Thursday in New York federal court on behalf of herself and other similarly situated employees. The Complaint alleges that Bovis misclassified Ms. Sewell and other similarly situated employees as exempt from the overtime requirements of the FLSA, NYLL, and NJWHL, and failed to pay them overtime for the hours they worked over 40 during many workweeks.

Attorneys Adam T. Klein, Justin M. Swartz, Jack A. Raisner, and Rachel M. Bien, of Outten & Golden LLP in New York, represent Ms. Sewell. They will seek to have the lawsuit certified as a class action that includes similarly situated Assistant Project Managers, Project Engineers, and other salaried employees below the level of "Project Manager" with different titles who performed similar duties to Ms. Sewell.

Return to Top

Mama Mexico Restaurants

Outten & Golden LLP, along with co-counsel Fitapelli & Schaffer, LLP, represent workers from three Mama Mexico restaurants in New York and New Jersey in claims that the restaurants violated federal and state wage and hour laws by withholding minimum wages, overtime compensation and misappropriating employee tips. The workers bring class action and collective action claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), the New York Labor Law (NYLL) and the New Jersey Wage and Hour Law (NJWL).

The lawsuit seeks to recover minimum wages, overtime compensation, misappropriated tips, and other wages for servers, bussers, runners, bartenders, and other hourly food service workers who have worked at the Mama Mexico restaurants at 2672 Broadway and 214 East 49th Street in New York City and in Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey. It also includes individual claims for retaliation, pregnancy discrimination, hostile work environment, and assault and battery.

According to the Restaurants’ website, Defendant Juan Rojas Campos, the founder and CEO of the Mama Mexico Restaurants, emigrated to the United States to fulfill his “American dream,” working as a “cleaning boy, bus boy, waiter and bartender.” Years later, Mr. Rojas Campos now owns and operates three “five star” Mama Mexico Restaurants in and around New York City. The website includes photographs of Mr. Rojas Campos with high-profile New Yorkers including former governor George Pataki and Donald Trump.

New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg touts Mr. Rojas Campos’ endorsement on his campaign website. According to Mayor Bloomberg’s website, Mr. Rojas Campos “settled in New York City in 1980, [and] worked his way up through the restaurant industry. He began as a dishwasher and made his way up to waiter. Eventually, he became general manager of numerous Mexican restaurants throughout New York City. After years in the industry, Rojas Campos decided to open his own restaurant and currently owns two locations in New York City.” Mayor Bloomberg said that Mr. Campos “exemplif[ies] the American dream.”

Unfortunately, however, the workers allege that Mr. Rojas Campos seems to have forgotten his humble beginnings and the struggles of low-wage restaurant workers trying to make ends meet and that his success and that of his Mama Mexico Restaurants has come on the backs of his hourly food service workers. Mr. Rojas Campos and the other Defendants – individuals and entities that own, operate, and/or manage the Restaurants – have denied their workers minimum wages and overtime pay for the many hours they worked and, in some cases, failed to pay these workers any wages at all, they allege. Defendants also misappropriated customer tips – the Plaintiffs’ principal source of income – by requiring them to pool their tips with workers who are not entitled to tips under the law, the workers claim.

Please email Justin M. Swartz (jms@outtengolden.com)or Rachel Bien (rmb@outtengolden.com) or call (212) 245-1000 for more information.

Return to Top

Cipriani Tips, Minimum Wages, and Overtime Wages

On December 21, 2009, Outten & Golden LLP filed a class action lawsuit against Cipriani event, catering and restaurant enterprises. The plaintiffs are current and former servers who worked at Cipriani events at Cipriani 42nd Street, Cipriani Wall Street, Cipriani 23rd Street, and the Rainbow Room. The lawsuit alleges that Cipriani withheld from workers mandatory tips or “service charges” collected from customers who were contracting with the restaurant for private parties and functions. The plaintiffs also allege that Cipriani failed to pay workers the minimum wage, required employees to work off the clock without pay, shaved time worked from plaintiffs’ time records, and paid them for fewer hours than they worked. Plaintiffs allege that Cipriani failed to pay plaintiffs call-in pay when they reported to work and were sent home. Finally, plaintiffs allege that Cipriani failed to pay for the purchase and maintenance of their required uniforms. Servers who worked for Cipriani staffing agencies Exquisite Staffing, CBI Personnel, and CTI Staffing, Inc. may be eligible to be part of the lawsuit.

Outten & Golden LLP is currently investigating reports of similar practices at other New York City restaurants.

Please email Justin M. Swartz or Molly A. Brooks or call (212) 245-1000 for more information.

Return to Top

Employment Discrimination Class Actions

Morgan Stanley Race Discrimination

Outten & Golden LLP and our co-lead counsel, Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP, and Altshuler Berzon LLP, represent a former Financial Advisor at Morgan Stanley DW, Inc. in a national class action race discrimination lawsuit filed in federal court in San Francisco. The case charges that Morgan Stanley’s retail brokerage arm engaged in a pattern and practice of race discrimination against its African American and Latino Financial Advisors and Financial Advisor Registered Trainees in compensation by favoring African American and Latino Financial Advisors and Registered Trainees in the distribution of business opportunities, accounts and other terms and conditions of employment throughout the company. A proposed settlement has been filed with the Court that provides for a class fund and substantial injunctive relief.

Please email Adam T. Klein (atk@outtengolden.com) or Justin Swartz (jms@outtengolden.com) or call (212) 245-1000 for more information.

Return to Top

Smith Barney Gender Discrimination

Outten & Golden LLP represents four female financial consultants who filed a national class action lawsuit on March 31, 2005 in federal court in San Francisco. The lawsuit charges sex discrimination at Smith Barney, the retail brokerage arm of Citigroup, which is the nation's largest financial institution. Our co-counsel on this case are Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein, LLP of San Francisco and Mehri & Skalet, PLLC, of Washington, DC.

The lawsuit, Fassbender Amochaev v. Citigroup Global Markets Inc., dba Smith Barney, alleges that Smith Barney has engaged in a pattern and practice of gender discrimination against its female financial consultants in account distribution, compensation, and other terms and conditions of employment throughout the company. The women allege violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and California law.

The complaint charges that, among other things, Smith Barney discriminates against women in the account distribution process, routinely assigning smaller and less valuable accounts to female brokers, including those who outperform their male counterparts; fails to provide women with the same level of sales and administrative support as it provides to men; and maintains a corporate culture hostile to female professionals.

People interested in the lawsuit should visit www.genderlawsuitagainstsmithbarney.com, where they can submit information, or call 1-800-642-8330 to leave a message for plaintiffs' counsel. They can also contact Adam T. Klein or Justin M. Swartz at (212) 245-1000 for more information.

Media coverage of this case:

AP Article - March 31, 2005
New York Times Article - April 01, 2005

Return to Top

Gristede’s Supermarkets Gender Discrimination

NEW YORK, October 24, 2006 /PRNewswire/ - Gristede’s Operating Corp., which owns Gristede’s supermarkets, faces allegations by former employees that the grocery store chain violated civil rights laws by segregating women into lower-paying jobs and failing to promote them to management positions, according to the New York law firm representing the former employees.

In a case filed Monday in New York federal court, the named plaintiffs – Vanessa Hill and Margaret Anderson, both of the Bronx – allege violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the New York State Human Rights Law, and the New York City Human Rights Law. Both women worked as part-time cashiers at Gristede’s in Manhattan. Hill worked for Gristede’s from February 1999 to January 2004, and Anderson worked there from November 2004 to December 2004.

The law firm of Outten & Golden LLP will seek to have the case certified as a class action that includes current and former female employees of Gristede’s. According to the Complaint, Gristede’s steers female job applicants into cashier and bookkeeper positions, while steering male applicants into clerk positions. The Complaint alleges that Gristede’s offers the clerks more opportunities for extra hours, full-time work, and promotion to management than it offers to cashiers and bookkeepers.

Attorney Piper Hoffman, of Outten & Golden, said, “We allege that the discrimination has been company-wide and pervasive. We believe the evidence will show that Gristede’s intentionally segregates women into positions that pay less and keeps them out of management.” Hoffman estimates that the lawsuit could include more than 3,000 women.

The case is “Hill v. Gristede’s Operating Corp.” (No. 06 CV 10197) (LTS) in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.

Please email Adam T. Klein atk@outtengolden.com, Justin M. Swartz jms@outtengolden.com , Lewis Steel ls@outtengolden.com or Cara Greene ceg@outtengolden.com or call (212) 245-1000 for more information.

Return to Top

Bellevue Hospital and New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation - Race Discrimination Based on Results of Criminal Background Check

On January 23, 2009, O&G’s client filed a class-wide race discrimination charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission against Bellevue Hospital and New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation alleging that HHC/Bellevue discriminates against African-American and Hispanic job applicants by illegally using criminal history reports in making hiring decisions. The charge alleges that O&G’s client interviewed for a clerical job at Bellevue/HHC, Bellevue/HHC offered her the job, but later revoked the offer of employment because she did not meet its “background requirements.” A blanket ban on hiring formerly incarcerated individuals has a disparate impact on African Americans and Hispanics because a disproportionate percentage of ex-offenders are racial minorities. An employer may not use hiring criteria that have a disparate impact on racial minorities unless it can show that those criteria are “job related” and “consistent with business necessity.” New York City and State laws also prohibit employers from discriminating against job applicants on account of their criminal convictions unless there is a “direct relationship” between the conviction and the job at issue. O&G is currently investigating similar claims at major retail chains and companies. Please contact Justin M. Swartz (jms@outtengolden.com) or Ossai Miazad (omiazad@outtengolden.com) for more information or to discuss similar matters.

Return to Top

Madison Square Garden - Race Discrimination Based on Results of Criminal Background Check

On August 14, 2008, O&G’s client filed a class-wide race discrimination charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission against Madison Square Garden alleging that MSG discriminates against African-American job applicants by illegally using criminal history reports in making hiring decisions. The charge alleges that, by revoking an offer of employment to O&G’s client, MSG violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and engaged in a policy or pattern and practice of discrimination against African-American job applicants. A corporate policy that bans hiring formerly incarcerated individuals has a disparate impact on African Americans and Hispanics because a disproportionate number of ex-offenders are racial minorities. An employer may not use hiring criteria that have a disparate impact on racial minorities unless it can show that those criteria are “job related” and “consistent with business necessity.” New York City and State laws also prohibit employers from discriminating against job applicants on account of their criminal convictions unless there is a “direct relationship” between the conviction and the job at issue. O&G is currently investigating similar claims major retail chains and companies. O&G is co-counsel in this matter with Manhattan Legal Services.

Please contact Justin M. Swartz (jms@outtengolden.com) for more information or to discuss similar matters.

Return to Top

Wage and Hour Class Actions

230 Fifth Avenue Tips, Minimum Wages, and Overtime Wages

On September 8, 2008, Outten & Golden filed a class action lawsuit against 230 Fifth Avenue, an upscale restaurant, bar, and party venue that has the distinction of being New York City’s largest rooftop bar. The plaintiffs allege that 230 Fifth Avenue withheld from workers mandatory tips or “service charges” collected from customers who were contracting with the restaurant for private parties and functions. The plaintiffs also allege that 230 Fifth Avenue failed to pay workers the minimum wage as well as overtime compensation for all hours worked over 40 per week, required employees to work off the clock without pay, and failed to keep accurate records of all hours employees worked. Servers, runners, bussers, bartenders, barbacks, and cocktail waitresses who worked at 230 Fifth Avenue may be eligible to be part of the lawsuit.

Outten & Golden LLP is currently investigating reports of similar practices at other New York City restaurants.

Please email Justin M. Swartz (jms@outtengolden.com or call (212) 245-1000 for more information.

Return to Top

HealthFirst Marketing Representatives Overtime Litigation

Outten & Golden LLP filed a class action lawsuit against HealthFirst, Inc., an HMO that provides Medicaid and other free health insurance programs to low-income New Yorkers, alleging that the company violated federal and state overtime laws by failing to pay overtime for hours worked over forty in a week. The plaintiffs, whom HealthFirst claims are exempt outside salespeople, are current and former Marketing Representatives who regularly worked well over forty hours per week identifying Medicaid-eligible individuals at various locations throughout New York City and Long Island and helping them sign-up for free health insurance programs. The case is called “Willix et al. v. HealthFirst, Inc. et al.” (No. 07-1143), and is currently pending in the district court for the Eastern District of New York before District Court Judge Eric N. Vitaliano and Magistrate Judge Ramon E. Reyes, Jr.

Please contact Justin M. Swartz (jms@outtengolden.com) or Rachel Bien (rmb@outtengolden.com) for more information.

Return to Top

Food Bazaar Minimum Wage and Overtime Case

Nine workers have filed suit for egregious violations of Federal and New York Labor laws at the Food Bazaar Supermarket in the Bushwick neighborhood of Brooklyn. The suit, filed yesterday in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, asks the court to award them more than $1.5 million in damages resulting from unpaid minimum wages and overtime compensation.

The nine workers, employed as grocery baggers, received no wages despite work schedules that exceeded fifty to sixty hours per week. Although they received tips from customers, the workers’ earnings from tips fell well below the required minimum wage. Under both New York and Federal law, the supermarket was required to pay the full minimum wage plus additional overtime pay for work weeks that exceeded forty hours.

Dinora Aybar, one of the nine plaintiffs and who worked at the supermarket for more than seven years, said, “They took advantage of our fears and made us compete with one another for crumbs. We worked there because this supermarket is in our community; we helped their business and they rewarded us for our hard work by firing us after not paying us for so many years.”

“The complaint alleges that, in addition to bagging groceries, Plaintiffs were required to fill in for cashiers, clean the check-out aisles, and restock unwanted grocery items—all at the direction of the Defendants,” explained Linda Neilan, an attorney with Outten & Golden LLP, who together with the Urban Justice Center represents the Plaintiffs.

According to David Colodny, an attorney with the Urban Justice Center, “The law is very clear that when an employer suffers or permits someone to work, the employer has to pay that person for the work.” Added Cara Greene, another Outten & Golden LLP attorney, “The federal and state labor laws were enacted to address situations exactly like this.”

The Bushwick Food Bazaar Supermarket is located at 454 Wyckoff Avenue, and is owned and operated by Bogopa, Inc. and Bogopa Service Corp. The Chief Executive Officer of both companies is Hwee Ill An. Bogopa Service Corp. is the parent company of eleven supermarkets in Brooklyn, Queens, the Bronx, and New Jersey, doing business under the trade names Food Bazaar and Food Dimensions.

The Plaintiffs are represented by Outten & Golden LLP and the Urban Justice Center.

Please email Linda A. Neilan (lan@outtengolden.com) or Cara E. Greene (ceg@outtengolden.com) or call (212) 245-1000 for more information.

Return to Top

Washington Mutual Loan Consultants, Loan Officers, and Loan Originators Overtime Pay Case

NEW YORK, June 6 /PRNewswire/ - Washington Mutual Inc. (NYSE:WM) faces allegations by former employees in New York, California and Illinois that the company violated labor laws by failing to pay overtime wages and the federal minimum wage of $5.15 per hour worked, according to two law firms representing the former employees.

In a case filed Monday in New York federal court, the named plaintiffs - Dewone Westerfield, of Grand Rapids, Mich., Charlotte Machado of Trussville, Ala, and Patricia Kemesies, of East Islip, N.Y., allege violations of the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) and various state labor laws.

The law firms of Nichols Kaster & Anderson, PLLP, of Minneapolis, Minn., and Outten & Golden LLP, of New York, will seek to have the case certified as a collective action that includes current or former home loan consultants (also referred to as loan officers and loan originators) who worked for Washington Mutual nationwide.

Ms. Kemesies worked as a home loan consultant at a Washington Mutual center in Hauppauge, N.Y. Ms. Machado worked for the company in Modesto, Calif. Mr. Westerfield worked for the company at a Chicago office.

According to the Complaint, the Washington Mutual home loan consultants regularly work hours in excess of 40 per week and have not received overtime compensation for all hours worked. If the loans they handle are not approved, the consultants may receive no pay for the long hours they work, and this practice violates the minimum wage law, according to the law firms.

Attorney Paul J. Lukas, of Nichols Kaster & Anderson, said, “We allege that the unlawful conduct has been widespread, repeated and consistent. We believe that Washington Mutual has willfully committed widespread violations of the FLSA, and that the company knew that these employees and others performed work that required overtime pay and minimum wages.”

Attorney Jack A. Raisner, of Outten & Golden said, “The law does not allow employers to avoid paying overtime compensation to people who handle mortgages and loans on a strictly commission basis. Paying them less than minimum wage when their commissions dip is particularly harsh given the long hours these people work.”

The case is “Westerfield v. Washington Mutual Inc.,” (No. 06 Civ 2817 CBA) in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York.

Attorney Contacts:

Jack Raisner
Outten & Golden LLP
New York
(212) 245-1000

Return to Top

Shelly’s New York / Fireman Hospitality Group Withheld Tips, Minimum Wages, and Overtime Case

Outten & Golden LLP and our co-counsel, the Asian American Legal Defense & Education Fund, represent a group of workers from Shelly's Prime Steak, Stone Crab & Oyster Bar, an upscale restaurant in Midtown Manhattan, in a lawsuit charging that Shelly’s, and its parent company, Fireman Hospitality Group, misappropriated tips, failed to pay overtime, and paid workers less than the minimum wage.

Servers, runners, bussers, and bartenders who have worked at Shelly’s between June 7, 2000 and the present may be eligible to be part of the lawsuit.

The four named plaintiffs in the suit are members of the Restaurant Opportunities Center in New York (ROC-NY), an organization that fights for New York restaurant worker's rights.

Outten & Golden LLP is currently investigating reports of similar practices at other restaurants in the Fireman Hospitality Group, and at other New York City restaurants. More than 50 current and former employees of the Redeye Grill, another Fireman Hospitality Group restaurant, filed a federal lawsuit in January 2006 alleging similar violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law. Plaintiffs in the Redeye Grill lawsuit are also members of ROC- NY.

Please email Justin M. Swartz (jms@outtengolden.com) or Linda A. Neilan (lan@outtengolden.com) or call (212) 245-1000 for more information.

Return to Top

Tyson Foods Meat Processing Plant Workers Unpaid Overtime Action

Outten & Golden, along with co-counsel Stueve Siegel Hanson Woody LLP, has filed a class action lawsuit against Tyson Foods alleging that employees in Tyson’s Garden City, Kansas meat processing plant did not receive wages and overtime pay as required by the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and Kansas state law. The case is called, “Garcia et al. v. Tyson Foods Inc. et al” (No. 06-2198-JWL) and is pending in U.S. District Court in Kansas City, Kansas. The workers allege that they were not paid for work duties including donning and doffing required work uniforms, putting on safety equipment (work pants; safety jump suits; safety boots; hair nets; face nets; hard hats; aprons; belts, holsters and knives; and hand and arm protection), and walking to and from the changing area, work areas, and break areas. More than 800 workers have joined the case as opt-in plaintiffs.

On February 16, 2007, the Judge presiding over our case denied Tyson’s request to dismiss the case. This decision clears the way for our clients to request that the case proceed as a class action. The Judge’s decision cites the United States Supreme Court’s 2005 decision holding that any activity that is “integral and indispensable” to a “principal activity” performed by workers is compensable under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Please email Justin M. Swartz jms@outtengolden.com or Linda A. Neilan lan@outtengolden.com or call (212) 245-1000 for more information.

Return to Top

American Home Mortgage Loan Officers Unpaid Overtime

Outten & Golden, has filed a nationwide class action lawsuit against American Home Mortgage alleging that loan officers were not paid overtime pay and minimum wage as required by the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and the state laws of California, New York, Illinois, Wisconsin, Washington, Colorado and New Jersey. The case is called, “Abrams et al. v. American Home Mortgage. et al” (No. C07-03252) and is pending in U.S. District Court for Northern California, San Francisco. The loan officers allege that they were paid on a commission-only basis for originating mortgage loan that they submitted to the company for processing. They worked in excess of 40 hours a week for which they received no extra compensation, and sometimes no compensation at all.

Return to Top

UPS Supervisor/Specialist Overtime Pay Class Action

Current and former United Parcel Service (NYSE:UPS) human resources department employees allege in a federal lawsuit that the company violated federal and New York state labor laws by misclassifying employees as exempt from federal overtime requirements, according to the law firm representing the employees.

Joseph Dorfman, of Amenia, N.Y., and Maryann Barone, of West Babylon, N.Y., allege in a lawsuit filed Feb. 16 that current and former employees at New York state facilities, including supervisors, part-time supervisors, specialists and part-time specialists, were misclassified by UPS as salaried employees exempt from the overtime requirements of the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”).

The law firm of Outten & Golden LLP, of New York, represents Mr. Dorfman and Ms. Barone, and will seek to have the case certified as a class action that includes current or former misclassified supervisor/specialist employees of UPS in the state of New York.

According to the Complaint, Mr. Dorfman, who has been employed by UPS since 2000, worked at the company’s Maspeth, N.Y., facility, and Ms. Barone, who worked for the company for about five years until 2005, was employed at UPS human resources department facilities in New York, Connecticut and New Jersey.

Jack A. Raisner, an attorney at Outten & Golden’s New York office, said, “We allege that UPS committed over a period of several years widespread violations of the FLSA by misclassifying New York employees in supervisor/specialist positions as exempt. We also allege that UPS reclassified certain employees as non-exempt early in or about January 2005, but has not paid them for overtime worked during several years prior to the filing of this suit.”

The case is “Joseph Dorfman and Maryann Barone v. United Parcel Service” (No. 06 CV 00703) in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York.

Please contact Jack Raisner by e-mail (jar@outtengolden.com) or phone (212) 245-1000 for more information.

Nationwide IBM Tech Worker Overtime Pay Class Action

On January 24, 2006, current and former IBM technical support employees filed a class action lawsuit against IBM alleging it failed to pay overtime wages in violation of federal and state labor laws. The suit, entitled Rosenberg et al. v. IBM, was filed in federal court in San Francisco.

The complaint charges that IBM illegally treats its employees who install, maintain or support computer software or equipment as "exempt" under federal and state labor laws so it does not have to pay them overtime.

Who Is In This Class?

The proposed classes in the class action include current and former IBM technical support workers with the primary duties of installing, maintaining, or supporting computer software and/or hardware for IBM who were not paid for their overtime work because IBM wrongly classified these employees as exempt.

What The Plaintiffs Want

The plaintiffs are asking the federal court to order IBM to pay technical employees for the overtime they have worked in the past, and to start paying overtime to employees who are eligible for it.

Share Your Experience/Contact an Attorney

The plaintiffs are represented by Outten & Golden LLP along with a several other firms nationwide including Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein, LLP in San Francisco, CA; Lewis Feinberg Renaker & Jackson, P.C. in Oakland, CA; Rudy, Exelrod & Zieff, LLP in San Francisco, CA; Spiro, Moss, Barness, Harrison & Barge, LLP in Los Angeles, CA; Lee & Braziel, LLP in Dallas, TX; Bruckner Burch, PLLC in Houston, TX; and Goldstein, Demchak, Baller, Borgen & Dardarian in Oakland, CA.

Please visit the case website at www.overtimepaylawsuitagainstibm.com, email Justin M. Swartz (jms@outtengolden.com) or call toll free (877) 468-8836 for more information.

Return to Top

Home Depot Overtime Class Action

O&G represents a former computer room supervisor and a former bookkeeper at Home Depot's Flushing, New York store, in a suit for unpaid regular and overtime wages for all current and former Flushing store workers dating back to July, 1999. The case, Hernandez v. Home Depot, has been filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York in Brooklyn and seeks to force Home Depot to pay hundreds employees the regular and overtime wages that they earned. The workers are seeking class action status.

These former Home Depot workers allege that, in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York wage and hour law, a Flushing Home Depot store manager pressured them to alter payroll records and shave overtime hours from other Home Depot workers store-wide, with the intent to reduce labor costs and thereby boost the manager's perceived performance. One of the plaintiffs, Dora Hernandez, alleges that Home Depot terminated her for complaining about this practice.

The Flushing Home Depot store was at one point the largest-grossing store in the home improvement superstore's chain. O&G is currently investigating the extent and impact of this alleged hour-shaving scheme, which is estimated to have affected hundreds of Home Depot workers.

Please contact Jack Raisner (jar@outtengolden.com) for more information.

Return to Top

HSBC Call Center Overtime Class Action

O&G represents two former HSBC call center workers from HSBC's call center facilities in Buffalo, NY and Depew, NY in a lawsuit alleging that HSBC denied them and their coworkers overtime pay required by federal Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") and New York state wage and hour laws. Our clients, James Stefaniak and Keith Panaccione, in their Class Action Complaint, allege that they were required to perform work outside their scheduled shifts, for HSBC's benefit, without compensation, and without the overtime premium that the wage and hour laws require employers to pay for hours worked in excess of 40 hours in a workweek.

Based on O&G's investigations into similar overtime practices at other call centers, it appears that HSBC is part of a larger industry trend -- requiring low-paid call center workers to work outside of their scheduled shifts without compensation or overtime pay. O&G's clients have filed class action lawsuits against several other companies that run call centers, including TeleTech, JP Morgan Chase, GEICO, and ClientLogic for similar practices that would violate the Fair Labor Standards Act and state wage and hour laws. O&G is currently investigating similar practices at other call centers in the Buffalo, NY area and nationwide, including an Adelphia call center in the Buffalo, NY area.

The case, James Stefaniak and Keith Panaccione v. HSBC Bank USA Inc., No. 05 CV 6528 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, seeks to force HSBC to pay thousands of employees the wages that they earned. The workers are seeking class action status.

HSBC runs call centers in Buffalo, N.Y.; Depew, N.Y.; Chesapeake, Va.; Wood Dale, Ill.; Las Vegas, Nev.; and other locations.
Please contact Justin M. Swartz (jms@outtengolden.com) or Tammy Marzigliano (tm@outtengolden.com) for more information.

Return to Top

ClientLogic Call Center Overtime Class Action

Did you receive a notice in the mail? Click here for FAQs,

More than 175 current and former ClientLogic call center workers have joined a federal lawsuit against ClientLogic alleging overtime violations. O&G has been contacted by more than 200 current and former ClientLogic call center workers from its call center facilities in Buffalo, NY; Lake City, FL; Kingstree, SC; and Starkville, MS; Huntington, WV and Las Vegas, NV.

In May 2005, two workers from ClientLogic’s Buffalo, NY call center filed a class action lawsuit alleging that they were required to perform work outside their scheduled shifts, for ClientLogic's benefit, without being paid regular pay or overtime pay. In investigating the claims against ClientLogic and other companies that run call centers, including TeleTech, JP Morgan Chase, GEICO, and HSBC, O&G has found this requirement to be a common practice in the call center industry. This violates the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and the New York State Labor Law which require ClientLogic to pay its hourly workers time and a half for all hours that they work beyond forty hours in a workweek - including time that they work outside of their scheduled shifts.

The case, Hens v. ClientLogic Operating Corporation, No. 05 CV 0381, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York, seeks to force ClientLogic to pay thousands of employees the wages that they earned. The workers are seeking class action status.

ClientLogic's call center customers include Sony, Microsoft and DirectTV. ClientLogic runs call centers in Buffalo, NY; Kenmore, NY; Tonawanda, NY; Andalusia, AL; Hamilton, AL; Winfield, AL; Milford, DE.; Lake City, FL.; Bogalusa, LA.; Starkville, MS; Las Vegas, NV.; Bloomfield, NJ; Clifton, NJ; Fairlawn, NJ; Weehawken, NJ; Albuquerque, NM; Asheville, NC; Columbus, OH; Bartlesville, OK; Norman, OK; Kingstree, SC; Nashville, TN; Oak Ridge, TN; Dallas, TX; Port Arthur, TX; and Huntington, WV.

Please contact Justin M. Swartz (jms@outtengolden.com) or Cara Greene (ceg@outtengolden.com for more information.

Return to Top

Duane Reade

O&G represents Kelvin Damassia, who filed a class action lawsuit against Duane Reade, Inc. for overtime violations in its drug stores throughout New York State. The suit, which was filed in federal court in New York, charges that the drug store chain, the largest in the New York metropolitan area, has engaged in a pattern of denying overtime to many of its employees by improperly categorizing them as exempt from the overtime requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York State Labor Law.

Please contact Linda A. Neilan (lan@outtengolden.com) or Justin M. Swartz (jms@outtengolden.com) for more information.”

Return to Top

Constantin Control Associates Class Action

O&G represents former Constantin Control Associates employees who filed a class action lawsuit in federal court seeking unpaid overtime and related remedies. The suit alleges that Constantin Control Associates has avoided paying overtime wages by misclassifying certain employees as hourly "consultants" in violation of the federal Fair Labor Standards Act and New York's Labor Law. The employees contend that they were placed into clerical positions at various financial institutions such as J.P. Morgan Chase, Bank of New York, Trust/Deutsche Bank, Rabobank, and ABN-AMRO while only receiving payment at their straight hourly rate for hours worked in excess of 40 in the work week.

Return to Top

JP Morgan Chase Class Actions

Customer Service and Call Center Workers

O&G represents current and former J.P. Morgan Chase customer service employees in New York who filed a class action lawsuit in state court seeking unpaid overtime and related remedies. The suit alleges that J.P. Morgan Chase has avoided paying overtime wages by misclassifying certain employees under New York's Labor Law. The employees contend that their jobs entail routine customer service functions for which J.P. Morgan Chase properly had paid them time-and-a-half overtime in the past. But after J.P. Morgan promoted them into re-titled positions, it stopped paying them overtime, although their functions remained the same. The claimants' job titles include client service officer, account officer, and assistant treasurer. According to Adam Klein, a lawyer with Outten & Golden LLP, one of the firms representing the employees: "There's been a lot of renaming of positions at J.P. Morgan, given the recent mergers. Along the way, the company has been converting positions from overtime-paying jobs, to exempt ones. The problem is that the employees are doing the same work as before. Employers are not relieved from their overtime obligations by 'promoting' employees into fancier-sounding positions that are different in name only."

The lawsuit also alleges that J.P. Morgan Chase requires its telephone-dedicated employees to work prior to and after their scheduled telephone shifts without pay in call centers located in New York State.

Call Center Workers

O&G represents a former J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. call center worker in Texas who filed a collective action lawsuit in federal court pursuant to the federal Fair Labor Standards Act. Outten & Golden has teamed up with two of Texas' top plaintiffs' law firms, Edwards & George and Bruckner Burch, to represent plaintiffs who worked in Texas, Florida, Arizona, Delaware, and several other states. The suit alleges that J.P. Morgan Chase requires its telephone-dedicated employees to work prior to and after their scheduled telephone shifts without pay in call centers located in numerous states. The case seeks recovery of unpaid wages and overtime premium pay for telephone-dedicated employees, who had to work before and after their scheduled telephone shifts without pay.

Return to Top

GEICO Class Action

Tillman et al. v. GEICO is a class action lawsuit filed on July 25, 2003, in New York State Supreme Court in Nassau County. Outten & Golden has joined with two of Texas' top plaintiffs' law firms, Edwards & George and Bruckner Burch, to represent the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs have brought the case under New York State law on behalf of all telephone-dedicated hourly employees who have been, or will be, employed by GEICO in its Woodbury, New York, facility at any time after July 25, 1997, through the date of final disposition of the action, who worked as telephone-dedicated employees in the Sales, Service, Direct Handling, or Claims Department. Those positions include: Sales Counselor, Sales Associate, Sales Representative, Liability Examiner, Direct Handler, Claims Representative, Liability Representative, Insurance Counselor, and Customer Service Representative. The case seeks recovery of unpaid wages and overtime premium pay for telephone-dedicated employees who had to work before and after their scheduled telephone shifts without pay. A settlement has been reached that provides for substantial monetary relief to the class. The terms of the settlement were approved by the court in late 2004, and the case is now closed.

Return to Top

Wal-Mart Class Action

We serve as co-lead plaintiffs' counsel in a putative wage and hour class action lawsuit against Wal-Mart alleging that a class of approximately 80,000 hourly employees in New York have not received proper compensation for all hours worked, including hours worked off-the-clock, or proper overtime premium pay in violation of the New York State Labor Law. The trial court denied class certification and the appellate court affirmed the decision. Recently, Wal-Mart agreed to settle numerous wage and hour cases across the country, including the New York case.

Return to Top

A&P Class Action

Foster et al v. Food Emporium

We serve as co-lead plaintiffs' counsel with Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein, LLP, in a lawsuit against the Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Company (A&P) alleging that a class of hourly-rate employees within the New York Metropolitan area have not received proper compensation for all hours worked (off-the-clock) or overtime premium pay for all hours worked in excess of 40 in a work week, in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). A settlement has been approved by the court that provides for a total payment of $3,110,000.

Lamarca et al v. A&P

On June 24, 2004, Outten & Golden LLP filed a second class action lawsuit against the Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Company, Inc., which operates A&P, The Food Emporium, and Waldbaum's. The plaintiffs, former employees of the supermarkets, charge that the chains fail to pay employees overtime wages and delete hours actually worked from time records in violation of New York labor law. The case covers all hourly full-time employees who were employed by A&P, The Food Emporium, and Waldbaum's in the State of New York from June 24, 1998, to the present.

Return to Top

Gristede's, A&P, and Duane Reade Deliverymen Class Action

www.nelp.org

We serve as co-lead plaintiffs' counsel with the National Employment Law Project (NELP) in a class action lawsuit against Gristedes, the Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Company (A&P), Duane Reade, and two labor agents alleging that a class of deliverymen have worked six or seven days a week, 10 to 12 hours a day, delivering groceries for sub-minimum wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and the New York State Labor Law. The Attorney General of the State of New York has also filed a lawsuit against A&P and is investigating these practices against the other defendants.

A class-wide settlement has been reached with four defendants in the total amount of $8.1 million plus additional job-related benefits.

Return to Top

TeleTech/Verizon Wireless

O&G represents call center workers in a collective/class action arbitration against TeleTech before the American Arbitration Association pursuant to the federal Fair Labor Standards Act, the New York Labor Law, and other state laws. Outten & Golden LLP has teamed up with the Kansas City, Missouri, law firm of Stueve Siegel Hanson Woody LLP to represent plaintiffs who work in call centers located in New York, Kansas, Virginia, and other locations. The arbitration demand, initially on behalf of some 900 workers, alleges that TeleTech requires its telephone-dedicated employees to work prior to and after their scheduled telephone shifts without pay. The case seeks recovery of unpaid wages and overtime premium pay for telephone-dedicated employees, who had to work before and after their scheduled telephone shifts without pay.

Return to Top

Gristede's

O&G represents current and former Gristede's grocery store employees in New York who filed a class action lawsuit in federal court seeking unpaid overtime and related remedies. The suit alleges that Gristede's has avoided paying overtime wages by misclassifying co-managers and night managers as exempt from the overtime requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York's Labor Law. The suit also alleges that Gristede's failed to pay other employees for all hours worked. The Complaint was recently amended to add a fraud claim based on allegations in the complaint that Gristede's systematically cheated workers out of millions of dollars in earned wages by falsifying payroll records. The Amended Complaint also added claims against the owner of Gristede's, John Catsimatidis, and two senior managers.

On September 29, 2006, Judge Crotty certified this case as a class and collective action. In deciding the motion for class certification in favor of the plaintiffs, the Court observed that “Given Gristede’s practice of treating co-managers and department managers as hourly workers, it is irrelevant that some individual plaintiffs or others similarly situated may have assumed duties that would otherwise make them exempt under the regulations. . . . Gristede’s clearly sought to treat workers as “hourly” for some purposes (i.e., docking them for hours not worked during the workweek), but “salaried” for other purposes (i.e., not paying them overtime for hours worked in excess of the workweek). The Court also noted that: “Here, the two provisions at issue expressly require that executive and administrative employees be paid a salary. Such salaried compensation, by definition, cannot be the hourly wages Gristede’s admitted company policy dictates. Since Plaintiffs have adduced convincing evidence that Gristede’s acknowledged company policy treated co-managers and department managers as hourly employees, Defendants cannot defeat commonality by pointing to individualized exemption determinations on the basis of duties.”

According to published sources, Gristede's, a leading New York City supermarket chain, is a subsidiary of the Red Apple Group. Another subsidiary of the Red Apple Group is United Refining, which processes 65,000 barrels of oil a day, distributes fuel to its 372 Country Fair/Red Apple gas stations/convenience stores in New York, Pennsylvania, and Ohio. The Red Apple Group also has real estate, aircraft leasing, and newspaper operations.

Return to Top

Donna Karan Garment Workers' Class Action

www.aaldef.org

We serve as co-lead plaintiffs' counsel with the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund (AALDEF) in a lawsuit against Donna Karan alleging that a class of garment workers were forced to work seven days a week, 12 hours a day, sewing high-priced clothing for Donna Karan at a unionized factory in New York's fashion district and that they did not receive minimum wage & overtime pay in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and the New York State Labor Law. The case is now settled.

Return to Top

New York Apple Tours Class Action

We serve as co-lead plaintiffs' counsel in a lawsuit against New York Apple Tours alleging that a class of drivers and tour guides did not receive overtime premium pay for hours worked in excess of 40 in a work week in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and other wage and hour violations of the New York State Labor Law. The court certified this as a class action under both Federal and State Law. The case is now settled.

We are investigating a number of potential employment discrimination class actions and class-based wage and hour claims. Please contact Adam T. Klein for further information.

Return to Top

New York Sports Club Class Action

On February 24, 2005, O&G filed a New York Supreme Court class action lawsuit against Town Sports International, Inc., the owner of the New York Sports Club, Boston Sports Club, Philadelphia Sports Club, and Washington Sports Club health and fitness clubs alleging that New York Sports Club has failed to pay its New York-based personal trainers and assistant fitness managers for all of the time that they worked and failed to pay them overtime compensation to which they are entitled under the New York Labor Law.

The personal trainers claim that New York Sports Club failed to pay them for much of the time, including overtime, that they worked for the benefit of New York Sports Club but were not actually training customers. The assistant fitness managers claim that New York Sports Club wrongly classified them as "exempt" employees and unlawfully failed to pay them overtime compensation that they earned. The case seeks recovery of unpaid wages and overtime premium pay for all personal trainers and assistant training managers in New York State.

O&G is currently investigating claims that other Town Sports International, Inc. brands, including Boston Sports Club, Philadelphia Sports Club, and Washington Sports Club have engaged in similar practices and have denied their personal trainers, assistant fitness managers, and other health club employees proper wages and overtime compensation. O&G is also investigating claims that other health and fitness clubs, including Equinox, have failed to pay their personal trainers earned wages, including overtime compensation. Please contact Justin Swartz or Seth Marnin for further information.

Return to Top

Precision

Settlement Agreement in Junes Santos v. Precision Pharma Services, Inc. and V.I. Technologies, Inc., 05/02446 (Suffolk Cty)

Outten & Golden LLP has reached a preliminary settlement on behalf of a class of technicians and mechanics employed by V.I. Technologies, Inc. between January 26, 1999 and August 14, 2001 (“class period). Class members are entitled to recover unpaid overtime premiums from V. I. Technologies during the class period. Class members should receive notice of the amount of their claim by March 14, 2006. The settlement agreement with V.I. Technologies is available here.

Return to Top

Bobby Flay Restaurants

On January 16, 2009, Outten & Golden filed a class action wage and hour lawsuit in the Federal District Court for the Southern District of New York against Bold Food, LLC, the company that operates celebrity chef Bobby Flay’s restaurants – Bar Americain in New York, Mesa Grill NYC in New York, Mesa Grill Las Vegas in Las Vegas, Nev., and Bobby Flay Steak at the Borgata Hotel in Atlantic City, N.J., and formerly owned and/or operated Bolo in New York. The plaintiffs allege that Mr. Flay’s company violated the wage and hour laws by engaging in improper tip-pooling practices; failing to properly distribute the “mandatory gratuities” it charged its private party customers; redistributing portions of employees’ tips to non-tip eligible employees; failing to pay proper overtime compensation to employees who worked more than 40 hours in a work week; failing to reimburse workers for the cost of purchasing and laundering required uniforms; and failing to pay workers “spread of hour pay” for days on which they worked more than ten hours. The complaint also charges that Bar Americain suspended one named plaintiff, Patrick deMunecas, in retaliation for raising concerns with management about the restaurants’ tip policies.

Please email Justin M. Swartz (jms@outtengolden.com) or Rachel Bien (rmb@outtengolden.com) or call (212) 245-1000 for more information.

Return to Top

For links to other legal resources, click on www.outtengolden.com/resources/links

Office Locations:
3 Park Avenue, 29th Floor New York, NY 10016 Telephone: (212) 245-1000		191 Post Road West Westport, CT 06880 Telephone: (203) 363-7888