|
Search
Search through the thousands of lawsuits, complaints and recalls on our site.
 |
Case ID: 4216 | Employment | 03/02/2005
A class action suit in Pennsylvania U.S. District Court alleges Lowe's Companies Inc. violated the Fair Labor Standards Act and Pennsylvania's Minimum Wage Act by withholding overtime payments to employees. Lowe's, which is based in Mooresville, N.C., operates more than 1,000 stores in 48 states. Lowe's denies violating state or federal wage laws in court papers it filed in the case.
Attorney Mary Walsh-Dempsey, a Scranton lawyer, said the plaintiffs include 550 people who had supervisory positions at Lowe's stores in the state. All the instances alleged in the case precede the change in federal overtime regulations in 2004, Mrs. Walsh-Dempsey said. U.S. District Judge A. Richard Caputo certified the suit's class-action status last in June 2004. The suit states that Lowe's pays department managers and assistant department managers salaries, while cashiers, sales, stocking and shipping employees earn hourly wages. The department managers and assistants had virtually no administrative responsibilities and assistant department managers do many of the same tasks as hourly workers, the suit charges. Lowe's led department managers and assistant managers to believe they were not entitled to their full salaries if they worked less than 40 hours a week, the suit states. The company bypassed hourly workers for overtime work, which was shifted to salaried employees, it charges. Lowe's required salaried employees to work overtime and perform nonmanagerial tasks, the suit alleges. According to the state Department of Labor and Industry, employees are entitled to at least minimum wage and overtime compensation at time and a half for working more than 40 hours a week. The Fair Labor Standards Act and Pennsylvania's Minimum Wage Act, though, do not call for overtime for "any employee engaged in a bona-fide executive, administrative, or professional capacity" who is paid a salary rather than hourly wages. Lowe's unsuccessfully tried to have the suit dismissed in May, 2004, claiming that management-level employees had agreed to the arrangement -- described as a Salaried Plus Overtime Plan. Judge Caputo said it was unclear whether employees understood the plan. Lowe's is a defendant in at least two other overtime-related federal suits. 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 collection action has been filed against the Puerto Rico Federal Affairs Administration and several of its employees on behalf of all employees of the administration who were not paid overtime compensation or minimum wage or were wrongly terminated after complaining to the administration about these payment discrepancies. The action is brought under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act and is seeking unpaid wages, statutory damages, and declaratory relief.
A class action has been filed on behalf of home health care workers employed by the S-Q Specialties, Inc., a Tulsa based provider of home health services. The suit alleges that workers employed at S-Q between 2001 and 2004 routinely worked more than 40 hours a week but were not paid overtime as required by the Federal Fair Labor Standards Act. The plaintiffs seek an award of the unpaid overtime with interest, attorney's fees and costs, as well as liquidated damages and equitable relief. A class action lawsuit has been filed in United States District Court against Citigroup Global Markets, Inc. The case was originally filed in San Francisco Superior Court but has been moved to the federal court system at the request of the defendants. The case involves violations of federal labor law. A case management conference before the court has been scheduled for March 5, 2005. 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. A class action has been filed against American Family Mutual Insurance Company, (AmFam) an insurance company that sells automobile insurance and employs more than 8,100 employees nationwide, for improperly classifying employees and failing to pay overtime compensation in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The class members seek compensatory damages, attorney’s fees and costs. A class-action lawsuit against Starbucks filed in San Diego is moving forward, according to court documents. San Diego Superior Court granted a motion for class certification in the case of Jou Chou v. Starbucks on March 30, 2006. In the case, Chou, a former coffee-server, or "barista," sued Starbucks over the company's policy of pooling tips and sharing them with managers and supervisors. Chou contends that this violates California labor laws. The federal Fair Standards Labor Act requires that most hourly employees be paid overtime wages if they work more than 40 hours in a normal workweek. A nationwide class action has been filed against Bank One, N.A., on behalf of all non-supervisory Group Bankers employed by Bank One since September 29, 2000, who allege that the company has not paid them overtime for hours they work in excess of their normal 40 hour workweek, in violation of the federal Fair Labor Standards Act. Qualified employees should join the action as soon as possible to prevent forfeiture of benefits because of the operation of federal statutory deadlines. |
IT'S FREE
|
© 2000 - 2008 Copyright. All rights reserved nola3, llc.
