ADR Services, Inc.

19000 MacArthur Boulevard

Suite 550

Irvine, California 92612

Class Actions: Wage & Hour / PAGA

Copyright © 2017 Robert D. Coviello, Esq. All Rights Reserved
Developed by ADR Services, Inc.

  • Plaintiff and putative class members were employed as Account Representatives by a state-wide lending institution.  Plaintiff alleged various wage/hour claims including off-the-clock, meal/rest, overtime issues and failure to reimburse for necessary expenses (L.C. 2802).

  • Plaintiff worked for a large manufacturing company and alleged class claims on behalf of approximately 1,100 putative class members.  The claims included allegations of improper overtime calculation; meal/rest violations, failure to reimburse for uniform cleaning and related PAGA penalties.

  • Representative PAGA action filed by former employee of popular restaurant.  Primary alleged violation was failure to provide compliant meal/rest periods.

  • Large putative class of non-exempt employees, working for a restaurant/music venue with several state-wide locations, alleged various wage/hour violations including: meal/rest period violations, split shift issues, donning and doffing issues; validity of “short-shift” waivers and PAGA penalties.

  • Agency providing in-home elder care services was sued by a former employee alleging class claims including overtime, travel time, 2802 reimbursement, meal/rest, split-shift premiums and on-call waiting time pay together with PAGA penalties.

  • Class action against state-wide hotel chain with 2,800 putative class members; claims included: regular rate calculation (was bonus included?), meal/rest premium pay; 2802 (cell phone use) and on-call issues.

  • Wage/Hour Class Action brought on behalf of certain registered pharmacists employed by a large national grocery retailer. Allegations included failure to provide and/or make available meal and rest periods due to business needs.

  • A group of servers employed by a statewide restaurant chain alleged wage/hour violations including: split-shift premiums, meal/rest violations and on-call issues.

  • Employee challenged validity of an adopted alternative work-week (4 x 10) alleging the voting procedure was not compliant with existing law.

  • National trucking company sued by two former employees alleging that the FLSA Exception (29 USC 13; 49 USC 31502) did not apply and therefore substantial overtime and penalties was due to the large putative class.

  • A group of town truck drivers alleged they and other similarly situated drivers should be paid for their “on-call” time. They argued the on-call requirements were unduly restrictive and therefore should be compensated as hours worked.