Did Sizzler Violate Labor Law by Failing to Provide Breaks to Employees?
/In recent news, Sizzler faces allegations that they failed to provide their employees with rest periods and breaks required by labor law.
The Case: Daniel Gayo v. BMW Management, Inc., BMW Management, LLC
The Court: Los Angeles County Superior Court of the State of California
The Case No.: 24STCV01215
The Plaintiffs: Daniel Gayo v. BMW Management, Inc., BMW Management, LLC
The plaintiff in the case, Daniel Gayo, filed a class action complaint against BMW Management, Inc. and BMW Management, LLC (the two entities jointly operate Sizzler restaurants and will collectively be referred to as "Sizzler") for allegedly failing to provide employees with timely, off-duty meal and rest periods.
The Defendant: Daniel Gayo v. Sizzler
The defendant in the case, BMW Management, Inc., BMW Management, LLC, faces multiple allegations that their standard business practices do not comply with labor law. California labor law requires all employers to pay their employees on an established payday for each pay period and pay no less than minimum wage for all hours an employee works in the payroll period. According to the plaintiff, Sizzler allegedly required employees to complete job-related tasks before and after their scheduled shifts and during off-duty meal breaks. The lawsuit alleges Sizzler did not compensate its employees for any of the resulting off-the-clock work. This standard practice resulted in Sizzler failing to pay its employees the applicable minimum wage for all hours worked in a payroll period. In full, the plaintiffs claim that Sizzler engaged in numerous labor law violations:
failed to pay minimum wage
failed to pay overtime wages
did not provide required meal and rest periods
failed to reimburse workers for necessary business expenses
failed to pay wages when due
did not provide accurate itemized wage statements
did not provide workers with all tips and gratuities
What is the Definition of "Hours Worked" for a California Employee?
To interpret California labor law, "hours worked" is the time during which an employee is subject to their employer's control, including all the time the employee is permitted to work, even if they are not "required to do so."
The Case: Daniel Gayo v. Sizzler
In the case, Daniel Gayo v. BMW Management, Inc., BMW Management, LLC (otherwise known as Sizzler), the plaintiff alleges Sizzler violated the California Labor Code by failing to pay its employees for all time worked. According to the lawsuit, Sizzler allegedly engaged in numerous labor law violations (violating California Labor Code Sections §§ 201, 202, 203, 204, 210, 226, 226.7, 510, 512, 558, 1194, 1197, 1197.1, 1198, and 2802). The case is currently pending in the Los Angeles County Superior Court of the State of California.
If you have questions about how to file a California wage and hour lawsuit, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw L.L.P. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in various law firm offices in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.