Employment Violations

The complaint for this class action alleges that workers at PotlatchDeltic Corporation were not properly compensated for all time worked. The complaint claims this is a violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and the Arkansas Minimum Wage Act (AMWA).

It’s frustrating when a person buys something at full price and the item is shortly afterwards put on sale. It’s nice when a company is willing to give the person a refund to make up for this. But does the company then have the right to take back some of the commission the sales associate earned on the sale? The complaint for this class action says that Macy’s West Stores, Inc. cannot take back what they’ve previously paid their sales associates.

Washington’s state labor laws are included in the Washington Annotated Code (WAC) and the Revised Washington Code (RWC). The complaint for this class action claims that Mattress Firm, Inc. violated these labor laws in its combining of hourly and piecework or commission wages, among other problems. 

The complaint for this lawsuit claims that FlyFit Holdings, LLC and Brian Chappon failed to pay plaintiff Alexander Ray Thurston properly and did not maintain accurate work records. It also alleges that Chappon did not maintain FlyFit as a legal entity separate from himself but more like an alter ego.

The complaint for this class action claims that Katch Twenty-Two, LLC and its owner violated the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) when it refused to pay plaintiff Nicholas J. Ferguson overtime when he worked more than forty hours in a week. 

This complaint brings a number of employee claims against Starbucks Corporation in California. One is that employees were not properly compensated for overtime and meal break premiums; another is that, when the employees received incentive pay, the incentive pay was not included in figuring the overtime and meal break premiums. The complaint claims that the company’s omissions are violations of the California Labor Code and the Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Order requirements.

This class action concerns the investments in the Frontier Communications 401(k) Savings Plan. The complaint alleges that Frontier Communications Corporation  and its Retirement Investment & Administration Committee did not fulfill their fiduciary duties to the plan, including maintaining adequate diversification, thus violating the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA).

Over the years, as companies sell out and merge and change identities, their internal plans can suffer changes. Plaintiff Vicki Michael worked in the same processing plant from 1974 to 2016, and she wants the retirement benefits she was promised when she began working there. But the complaint for this class action claims that company changes are unfairly depriving her of those benefits, in violation of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA).