Sea West Services Faces Allegations of Wage and Hour Violations

A lawsuit filed recently claims Sea West Services violated California’s Labor Code when they allegedly failed to provide their workers with timely, off-duty meal breaks and rest periods.

The Case: Jose Ruelas v. Sea West Services, LLC

The Court: Alameda County Superior Court of the State of California

The Case No.: 23CV038585

The Plaintiff: Jose Ruelas v. Sea West Services, LLC

The plaintiff in the case, Jose Ruelas, filed a class action complaint alleging that the defendant failed to provide employees with timely, off-duty meal breaks and rest periods as required by labor law.

The Defendant: Jose Ruelas v. Sea West Services, LLC

The defendant in the case, Sea West Services, faces allegations that they violated numerous employment laws, including California Labor Code Sections §§ 201, 202, 203, 204, 210, 226, 226.7, 510, 512, 558, 1194, 1197, 1197.1, 1198, and 2802.

According to the wage and hour lawsuit, the company violated employment law by

(1) failing to pay minimum wages;

(2) failing to pay overtime wages;

(3) failing to provide required meal and rest periods;

(4) failing to provide accurate itemized wage statements;

(5) failing to pay wages when due;

(6) failing to reimburse employees for required expenses; and

(7) failing to pay sick pay.

The Case: Jose Ruelas v. Sea West Services, LLC

In the case Jose Ruelas v. Sea West Services, LLC, the court will consider the application of state and federal labor codes. In California, employers must pay their employees on the established payday for each pay period, no less than minimum wage, for all hours worked during the pay period. According to the plaintiff, Sea West Services, LLC failed to compensate workers for work they needed to complete before and after their scheduled shifts and off-duty breaks. The off-the-clock work went uncompensated.

If you have questions about how to file a California wage and hour lawsuit, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. 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.

Rady Children's Hospital-San Diego Faces Wage and Hour Violation Allegations

San Diego's Rady Children's Hospital faces wage and hour violation allegations.

The Case: Stephanie Jones v. Rady Children's Hospital

The Court: San Diego County Superior Court of the State of California

The Case No.: 37-2023-00027035-CU-OE-CTL

The Plaintiff: Stephanie Jones v. Rady Children's Hospital

Jones, the plaintiff in the case, filed a class action complaint alleging that Rady Children's Hospital-San Diego violated the California Labor Code.

The Defendant: Stephanie Jones v. Rady Children's Hospital

The defendant in the case, Rady Children's Hospital, faces numerous labor law violation allegations, including:

• Failure to pay minimum wages

• Failure to pay overtime wages

• Failure to provide legally required meal and rest periods

• Failure to provide accurate itemized wage statements

• Failure to reimburse employees for required expenses

• Failure to pay sick wages

• Failure to pay wages when due

The allegations constitute violations of various applicable Labor Codes, including California Labor Code Sections 201-204, 226, 226.7, 233, 246, 510, 512, 1194, 1197, 1197.1, 2802, and the applicable Wage Order(s). The alleged violations would give rise to civil penalties.

The Case: Stephanie Jones v. Rady Children's Hospital

According to the complaint and the plaintiff's allegations, Rady Children's Hospital-San Diego restricted their employees' activities, preventing unconstrained walks. Employees could not leave work premises during their rest periods. Since the applicable California Wage Order requires employers to provide employees with off-duty rest periods, and California's Supreme Court defined "off duty" as time when an employee is relieved from all work-related duties and free from employer control, this alleged behavior constitutes a labor law violation. The case, Stephanie Jones v. Rady Children's Hospital, is currently pending in the San Diego 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 LLP. 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.

Verizon Faces Another Overtime Lawsuit

There is no shortage of overtime lawsuits when it comes to Verizon.

The Case: Santillan v. Verizon Connect Inc. et al.

The Court: U.S. District Court in the Southern District of California

The Case No.: 3:21-cv-01257

The Plaintiff: Santillan v. Verizon Connect Inc. et al.

The plaintiff in the case, Santillan, and more than 500 employees, claimed they were denied overtime, meal and rest breaks, and expense reimbursements. The plaintiffs claim that the company’s standard practices violated California labor law and federal labor laws.

The Defendant: Santillan v. Verizon Connect Inc. et al.

The defendant in the case is Verizon Connect Inc. et al. Verizon Communications Inc. is an American multinational telecommunications giant. Antonio Hiram Santillan originally filed the complaint in May 2021, alleging that Verizon Connect (a Verizon subsidiary) failed to include nondiscretionary bonuses in overtime rate calculations and failed to either provide or compensate workers for mandatory meal breaks. Santillan worked as a salaried, non-exempt Verizon employee from January 2020 to December 2020. Santillan’s San Diego putative class action alleged that Verizon:

• failure to pay overtime wages at the legal overtime pay rate

• failure to provide all meal periods

• failure to pay all wages

• failure to reimburse business expenses

• failure to timely furnish accurate itemized wage statements

• unfair business practices

The Case: Santillan v. Verizon Connect Inc. et al.

The parties attended mediation on January 30, 2023, and reached a settlement agreement between Verizon and hundreds of current and former employees. In June 2023, U.S. District Judge Marilyn L. Huff granted preliminary approval of the $1.6 million settlement to resolve the California labor wage and hour class action lawsuit. The judge ruled that the settlement represented an acceptable resolution for the case. Under the proposed settlement agreement, the class would receive about half their expected damages with expectations that class members would see $1,800 payouts.

If you have questions about how to file a California overtime lawsuit, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced overtime attorneys are ready to assist you in various law firm offices in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.

Female Disney Employees File Gender Discrimination Lawsuit

A group of female Disney workers filed a lawsuit accusing Disney of sexual discrimination and demanding that Disney provides employees equal pay for equal work regardless of gender.

The Case: Laronda Rasmussen v. The Walt Disney Company

The Court: Superior Court for County of Los Angeles

The Case No.: 19STCV10974

The Plaintiff: Laronda Rasmussen v. The Walt Disney Company

The plaintiff in the case, Laronda Rasmussen, and a group of current and former female Disney employees claimed they were paid more than $150 million less than men in similar middle management positions. The women claimed the alleged pay difference violated the Fair Employment & Housing Act and California’s Equal Pay Act. According to the plaintiffs, Disney regularly underpays their female employees, skips over them for promotions, gives them extra work with no additional compensation, and fails to provide them with sufficient support staff to enable them to succeed.

The Defendant: Laronda Rasmussen v. The Walt Disney Company

The defendant in the case, The Walt Disney Company, underwent statistical studies that seem to support the gender pay inequality claims. David Neumark, a professor at California Irvine, labor economist, and gender pay gap expert, analyzed Disney’s human resource data from April 2015 through December 2022 and determined female Disney employees were paid about 2% less than male employees. From 2015 to 2017, the study discovered an even greater gender difference in starting pay (4.36%). When Disney stopped using their prior salary policy that affected starting pay for new hires, the starting pay disparities dropped to 1.3%.

The Case: Laronda Rasmussen v. The Walt Disney Company

The plaintiffs filed their discrimination lawsuit in Los Angeles County Superior Court, demanding equal pay for equal work. The plaintiffs hope the judge will certify their four-year-old civil suit as a class action. Approximately 12,500 current and former female Disney employees in California could be affected from 2015 to the present. LaRonda Rasmussen, a manager of product development for Disney, originally filed the suit. Rasmussen claimed that six male employees were paid between $16,000 and $40,000 more than her for similar job duties.

If you have questions about how to file a California discrimination lawsuit, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. 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.

Elon Musk’s X Faces Discrimination and Breach of Contract Allegations

In recent news, X (previously known as Twitter) faces discrimination and breach of contract allegations.

The Case: Chris Woodfield v. Twitter/X

The Court: U.S. District Court, State of Deleware

The Case No.: 1:23-cv-00780-UNA

The Plaintiff: Chris Woodfield v. Twitter/X

The plaintiff in the case, Chris Woodfield, filed a workplace discrimination and breach of contract lawsuit on July 18th in Delaware. In addition to breach of contract and discrimination allegations, Woodfield alleged the company engaged in fraud. According to Woodfield, X targeted women, older employees, and employees of color in the mass layoffs. Woodfield also claims that the company stalled attempts to address the dispute through arbitration, specifically claiming that the company failed to pay the required fees to initiate arbitration of the issues. Like the California ERISA violation lawsuit the company faces, the Woodfield v. Twitter/X lawsuit claims the company owes former employees more than $500 million.

The Defendant: Chris Woodfield v. Twitter/X

The defendant in the case, Twitter/X, engaged in multiple layoffs after new ownership/management took over the social media giant. Nearly 4,000 workers were laid off (layoffs occurred in November 2022, twice in December 2022, and again in February 2023). According to court documents, HR officials at the company repeatedly told Musk and employees that any laid-off employees would be eligible for severance pay as determined in their 2022 agreement when X merged with Twitter.

The Case: Chris Woodfield v. Twitter/X

The case, Chris Woodfield v. Twitter/X, makes it clear how important it is for employers to be transparent about their severance benefits. Employers must communicate the reasons behind any layoffs clearly to all affected employees and explain the severance packages they receive in detail. Employers and employees benefit from a consistent severance pay policy that clearly outlines the criteria for determining any potential severance pay package based on pre-determined factors like time at the company, job title/level, performance history, etc. The clearly outlined policy must then be followed with a consistent application of the policy to all employees to avoid discrimination.

If you have questions about how to file a California discrimination class action lawsuit, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. 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.

Parents of College Runner Who Committed Suicide File Wrongful Death Lawsuit

In recent news, the parents of a college runner with disabilities who committed suicide, 23-year-old student Julia Pernsteiner, filed a wrongful death lawsuit claiming the coach bullied the students.

The Case: Ray and Lynne Pernsteiner v. Jacksonville University

The Court: Fourth Judicial Circuit, Duval County

The Case No.: 166080988

The Plaintiff: Ray and Lynne Pernsteiner v. Jacksonville University

The plaintiffs in the case are the parents of a 23-year-old disabled Division I runner and student at Jacksonville University (JU) in Florida. In 2021, after being cut from the school’s cross-country team, Julia Pernsteiner died by suicide. On Feb. 3, 2023, Julia’s parents filed a lawsuit alleging the school allowed the team’s coach to bully and berate the students on the team and failed to implement necessary accommodations for student success. The Pernsteiners claim that the coach and the school drove their daughter to suicide by subjecting her to a toxic coach and denying her the academic accommodations they promised to enable her success.

The Defendant: Ray and Lynne Pernsteiner v. Jacksonville University

The defendant in the case is Jacksonville University. According to the parents of Julia Pernsteiner, the university’s coach bullied the team and created an oppressive atmosphere full of intimidation and humiliation. They also claim that he belittled, disparaged, and ridiculed runners that fell short of his standards.

The Case: Ray and Lynne Pernsteiner v. Jacksonville University

In Ray and Lynne Pernsteiner v. Jacksonville University, the plaintiffs claim that despite agreeing to do so in Julia Pernsteiner’s 504 plan, JU did not provide a scribe, reader, professors’ notes, or assistive technology to support her success and never contacted her parents with updates on her progress as promised. Additionally, Julia’s parents claim that the oppressive, intimidating atmosphere the university allowed the coach to create was the catalyst that caused their daughter’s death. Other students backed up the claims and pointed out other inappropriate behavior by the university women’s cross-country team coach. One student even claimed she reported the coach’s behavior twice, but the school had no response.

If you have questions about how to file a California wrongful death lawsuit, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced wrongful death attorneys are ready to assist you in various law firm offices in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.

Foodservices Giant Faces Religious Discrimination and Wrongful Termination Allegations

A food services corporation recently found itself facing serious employment law violation allegations.

The Case: Rogers v. Compass Group USA, Inc. et al.

The Court: United States Court for the Southern District of California

The Case No.: 3:23-cv-01347-TWR-KSC

The Plaintiff: Rogers v. Compass Group USA, Inc. et al.

The plaintiff in the case, Rogers, worked as an Internal Mobility Team recruiter for the defendant. During her time with the company, Rogers consistently received positive performance feedback from her colleagues and supervisors. However, she claims that the defendant fired her after she would not endorse, promote, or participate in a program she felt was blatantly discriminatory (based on both race and gender). Rogers filed a discrimination and wrongful termination federal lawsuit on July 24, 2023.

The Defendant: Rogers v. Compass Group USA, Inc. et al.

Compass Group USA, Inc., is the defendant in the case, one of the largest corporations in the world. According to the plaintiff, Compass Group USA Inc. initiated a program they falsely labeled a “diversity” initiative. According to the plaintiff, the program was designed to prevent white men from participating in promotions and benefits. Courtney Rogers discussed her concerns with the company and requested accommodations to work in a different area. According to Rogers, she advised the company the program conflicted with her strongly held religious beliefs that hold all people equal regardless of race or gender. According to court documents, HR assured Rogers that the company would not retaliate against her for her beliefs and that she would receive a different assignment as an accommodation. However, that same HR representative terminated Rogers’ employment two weeks later. In their first meeting, Rogers was assured she was doing excellent work, but her termination letter two weeks later stated she was being terminated for unsatisfactory performance.

The Case: Rogers v. Compass Group USA, Inc. et al.

In the case, Rogers v. Compass Group USA, Inc., et al., Compass describes their program initiative as “Operation Equith,” calling it a diversity program offering qualified members special training and mentorship with the promise of guaranteed promotion within the program. The program was only available to women and people of color. The lawsuit demanded a jury trial seeking relief from religious discrimination, citing a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, and violations of wrongful termination public policy. Plaintiffs seek compensatory damages and mandatory training for the company’s senior management in human resources.

If you have questions about how to file a California wrongful termination lawsuit, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced wrongful termination attorneys are ready to assist you in various law firm offices in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.