|
Search
Search through the thousands of lawsuits, complaints and recalls on our site.
 |
Case ID: 3679 | Employment | 09/21/2004
A class action has been filed against Connecticut Light & Power, a CT based utilities company, by two former workers who were hired as independent contractors, but allegedly treated as employees. As independent contractors, the workers did not receive benefits according to CL&P’s ERISA and non-ERISA employee benefit plans. The workers claim that their job duties were identical to actual employees of CL&P and are suing for compensatory damages and lost benefits.
The facts of the case state that Charles Brown and Anthony Szalkiewicz were hired by CL&P in 1990, but were told that they would be treated as employees of the Technical Aid Corporation, a vendor for CL&P, rather than maintaining them as employees on CL&P’s payroll. This arrangement was supposed to be temporary and both plaintiffs were told that they would eventually become CL&P employees, which never occurred. According to the complaint, both workers were required to sign in and out with CL&P employees, reported to CL&P supervisors, submitted weekly payroll expenses which were approved by CL&P supervisors, and were under complete CL&P supervision. All of these factors argue for legally defining the workers as employees. After being terminated in 2002, the workers brought suit against CL&P for themselves and others similarly situated.
At Lawcash.com, it is our goal to keep you informed about important legal cases, class actions and settlements. Our lawyers offer free legal evaluations in tort cases, class actions, personal injury, and other lawsuits because we are dedicated to helping you resolve your legal complaints. Other Employment Cases of Interest A lawsuit brought by former officers and a current employees of the Lake Worth, Florida police department claims the department violated employees privacy by recording their personal phone conversations.
The issue of corporate health plan prescription contraceptive coverage is growing quickly. A class action has been filed against DaimlerChrysler Corporation on behalf of women employees who allege that the company discriminated against them by failing to include prescription contraceptives in its health plan coverage in violation of federal civil rights laws.
Corporate retirement plans can be a great investment, but it never hurts to diversify. A class action has been filed against energy services holding company TXU Corporation and its officers, executives, and board of directors on behalf of participants and beneficiaries of the TXU Thrift Plan who invested in TXU common stock through the plan between November 23, 2001, and October 11, 2002. The action alleges that the defendants breached their fiduciary duties to plan participants, violating the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act.
Mel McLean, owner of the Eel River Sawmills, and his wife Grace, had no children around 1988 when they created an Employee Stock Ownership Plan, according to background information in the lawsuit’s fourth amended complaint. The McLeans intended and promised to pass the majority ownership of Eel River Sawmills to its employees through the plan, the lawsuit stated.
“If the promise had been kept, the employees would have had a majority ownership of the company and the dollar value of the company at the time of (owner Mel McLean’s) death appears to have been well in excess of $25 million,” the attorney for the plaintiffs said. A class action lawsuit has been filed in the Southern District of Florida against Holcombe USA, Inc. The case involves violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act which establishes minimum wage, overtime pay, recordkeeping, and child labor standards affecting full-time and part-time workers in the private sector and in Federal, State, and local governments. No additional information about the substance of the allegations is available at this time. Classactionamerica.com will monitor this case and provide additional details as soon as they become available. In 2000, California Supreme Court ruled that workers must get paid for compulsory travel time. The court has rendered a $13+ million and verdict in a class-action filed against D'Arrigo Brothers Company on behalf of laborers, who alleged that the company failed to pay them for thousands of hours spent traveling on company vans to and from the crops they picked between 1996 and 2000. The money will not be distributed until all possible appeals have been exhausted. |
IT'S FREE
|
© 2000 - 2008 Copyright. All rights reserved nola3, llc.
