Skip to content Skip to navigation

Employment Violations


California’s labor laws require one day’s rest in each workweek. If an employee works on the seventh day, the laws require that the employee be paid at a time-and-a-half rate for the first eight hours of that day. Some employers are simply not bothering to comply with this law, and we’re currently investigating the possibility of filing class actions against them. However, the law is a little more complicated than it looks on the surface. For example, some positions are exempt from this law. Also, the period to be considered is not simply any seven-day period but the employee’s regular workweek.

Washington State Patrol Car

This is the settlement for a class action alleging that, prior to January 1, 2013, the Washington State Patrol (WSP) did not give employees and applicants the veteran preferences they were entitled to in the hiring and promotion processes. State law in Washington requires that state agencies such as the WSP give preference points to eligible, honorably-discharged military veterans.


The complaint for this class action alleges that a hotel chain did not follow Illinois regulations for the taking, retention, and use of “biometric data.” The complaint claims that the hotel was using employee fingerprint scans as a means of clocking in and out, but did not observe regulations on such things as informing employees, obtaining releases, and having proper retention and destruction policies.

Walmart Sign

This class action alleges that the Walmart store in Chino, California violated California employment laws by failing to pay minimum wages for all hours worked; failing to pay overtime for hours in excess of eight per day or forty per workweek; failing to let employees take a second meal break when they worked a shift in excess of ten hours; failing to keep accurate wage statements; and failing to pay all money owed at termination of employment.

Gucci Store

This settles a class action against Gucci America, Inc. and related companies Yves Saint Laurent America, Inc., Stella McCartney America, Inc., and Bottega Veneta, Inc.

Drilling Fluid Engineering

A common problem in employment cases is the misclassification of full-time employees as “consultants” in order to avoid giving them overtime pay or other requirements of employment law. That’s what the complaint for this class action alleges about the employment of plaintiffs Joshua Serrette and Timothy Hemphill, who worked for the defendants as “mud engineers,” or drilling fluid consultants. The complaint seeks offers evidence that the two men were in fact employees and not independent contractors, and that they should have been paid overtime for all hours worked over forty, according to federal, Ohio, and Pennsylvania laws.

Home Care Workers

Workers in low-wage industries are often exploited by attempts to circumvent or ignore labor laws. One of these industries is home care, according to the complaint, whose workers in 2015 were specifically given the right to seek redress under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The employer of plaintiff Cassandra Jones, Good Shepherd Healthcare has more than one hundred home care workers in the state of Kentucky. According to the complaint, Jones attended patients in their homes to help them with their basic needs, including cooking and cleaning, and regularly worked more than forty hours per week. In fact, the complaint says, some weeks Jones worked as many as ninety hours—and yet was paid the same for every hour that she worked. In other words, the complaint claims that, in violation of the FLSA, the company did not pay its workers the overtime they were due.

MFS Logo

When a company administers a defined-contribution retirement plan, the complaint for this class action says, the potential for violating its fiduciary duties can be high. The complaint alleges that fiduciaries for Massachusetts Financial Services (MFS) Company’s two plans—its Defined Contribution Plan and its MFSavings Retirement Plan—breached their duties under ERISA, executed prohibited transactions, and did not act with prudence or with the good of the plans in mind. Among other things, the complaint claims that MFS mutual funds were the primary offerings in the plan, that the funds had high expenses, and that fiduciaries executed transactiosn that are forbidden by ERISA.

Chemonics Logo

This class action alleges that GreatBanc Trust, a trustee for the Chemonics International, Inc. Employee Stock Ownership Plan, violated the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) as well as its fiduciary duties in buying Chemonics International stock at prices higher than fair market value.

Grape farm

This settles a class action brought by agricultural grape workers against Delano Farms and the labor companies who represented them. The complaint alleges that the companies violated labor laws in requiring unpaid, off-the-clock work, not reimbursing workers for necessary tool expenses, and not properly compensating workers for breaks.