Call
Email
Menu

Unpaid Overtime Case Against Shearer's Foods LLC

Our firm has filed an unpaid overtime case against Shearer’s Foods LLC (“Shearer’s”) related to its failure to compensate hourly, non-exempt production/manufacturing employees all overtime wages earned for multiple reasons. The lawsuit alleges that hourly employees are: (1) not paid for all hours worked before or after their scheduled shifts because the timekeeping system rounds down their compensable hours worked to employees’ scheduled shifts, despite the fact that employees are performing work for Shearer’s during this time period; and (2) not paid for rest periods of twenty (20) or fewer minutes per day even though the law requires that rest periods of 20 minutes or less must be counted as hours worked. If you have any questions or would like more information about the Shearer’s unpaid overtime case, please contact our office for a free, confidential consultation.

Overtime Cases Against Cushman & Wakefield (C&W Facility Services, Cushman & Wakefield, Inc., and Cushman & Wakefield U.S., Inc.) for Maintenance Employees

Our firm has filed an unpaid overtime case against C&W Facility Services, Inc. (“C&W” or “Cushman & Wakefield”), a subsidiary of Cushman & Wakefield, related to its failure to compensate hourly, non-exempt maintenance employees for missed or interrupted meal breaks, which resulted in unpaid overtime for these employees. The allegations state that C&W’s hourly, non-exempt maintenance employees’ meal breaks were regularly interrupted by job duties (such as repairing machinery and equipment) that did not allow them to be completely relieved of their job duties. The lawsuit alleges that these Cushman & Wakefield maintenance employees were not properly compensated for overtime wages for all overtime work they performed. If you have any questions or would like more information about this case, please contact our office for a free, confidential consultation.

Our firm has also filed a companion unpaid overtime case against Cushman & Wakefield, Inc. and Cushman & Wakefield U.S., Inc. (also “C&W” or “Cushman & Wakefield”), related to C&W’s failure to compensate hourly, non-exempt maintenance employees for missed or interrupted meal breaks, which resulted in unpaid overtime for these employees. The allegations state that C&W’s hourly, non-exempt maintenance employees’ meal breaks were regularly interrupted by job duties (such as repairing machinery and equipment) that did not allow them to be completely relieved of their job duties. The lawsuit alleges that these Cushman & Wakefield maintenance employees were not properly compensated for overtime wages for all overtime work they performed. If you have any questions or would like more information about this case, please contact our office for a free, confidential consultation. Our office is seeking to combine / consolidate the case filed against C&W Facility Services, Inc. and Cushman & Wakefield, Inc. and Cushman & Wakefield U.S., Inc.

Unpaid Overtime Case Against Schutz Container Systems

Our firm has filed an unpaid overtime case against Schutz Container Systems, Inc. (“Schutz”) related to its failure to compensate hourly, non-exempt employees all overtime wages earned for several reasons. The lawsuit alleges that hourly employees are: (1) not paid for all hours worked before or after their scheduled shifts because the timekeeping system rounds down their compensable hours worked to employees’ scheduled shifts; (2) not paid for rest periods of fifteen (15) minutes per day even though the law requires that rest periods of 20 minutes or less must be counted as hours worked; (3) not paid at the correct regular rate of pay when they receive performance bonuses; and (4) not paid all overtime compensation due to deductions from their pay to purchase and/or maintain certain tools of trade such as uniforms. If you have any questions or would like more information about the Schutz unpaid overtime case, please contact our office for a free, confidential consultation.

Meal Break Overtime Case Against StoryPoint Senior Living

Our overtime lawyers have filed an unpaid overtime case against StoryPoint Senior Living (“StoryPoint”) related to its failure to fully and properly pay hourly employees for all overtime hours worked. The allegations include that hourly employees at StoryPoint required a daily meal break deduction even though employees were often unable to take a full, uninterrupted 30-minute meal break. Additionally, the allegations include that StoryPoint did not properly calculate its hourly employees’ regular rates of pay during weeks in which employees were in overtime because it did not factor in pickup shift bonuses, COVID-19 bonuses, and/or other nondiscretionary bonuses to their regular rates of pay for purposes of calculating their overtime rates of pay. Because of StoryPoint’s meal break deduction and failure to include all additional remuneration, including nondiscretionary bonuses, in employees’ regular rate of pay calculations, StoryPoint employees were not fully and properly compensated all overtime wages that they earned. If you have any questions or would like more information about the StoryPoint unpaid overtime case, please contact our employment attorneys for a free, confidential consultation.

Unpaid Overtime Meal Break Lawsuit Against Landmark Recovery / Praxis

Our unpaid overtime lawyers have filed an unpaid overtime case against Landmark Recovery / Praxis (“Landmark Recovery”) related to its failure to compensate its hourly direct care employees for missed, interrupted, and/or shortened meal breaks, which resulted in unpaid overtime for these employees. The allegations include that hourly Landmark Recovery direct care employees’ meal breaks were regularly interrupted by job duties that did not allow them to be completely relieved of such job duties for a full 30 minutes. The lawsuit alleges that these direct care employees were not properly compensated for overtime wages for overtime work that they performed. If you have any questions or would like more information about the missed/interrupted meal break case against Landmark Recovery, please contact our office for a free, confidential consultation.

Registered Behavior Technician Unpaid Overtime Case Against Hopebridge

Our firm has filed an unpaid overtime case against Hopebridge, LLC (“Hopebridge”) related to its failure to compensate hourly, non-exempt registered behavior technicians (“RBTs”) for its companywide unlawful break policy, including that it required RBTs to clock out for all breaks and “meal breaks” regardless of how short. Hopebridge maintained a written policy that required RBTs to clock out for all breaks of 15 minutes or more, but it required employees to clock out for all breaks. Despite clocking out for a “meal break,” RBTs regularly performed work during such breaks. In addition to its unlawful break policy, Hopebridge failed to pay registered behavior technicians for all overtime work performed for several other reasons. First, RBTs were not performed for pre-shift work they performed off-the-clock prior to the scheduled start of their shifts. Second, RBTs were not paid for all time spent attending pre-shift group meetings. Third, RBTs were not paid for time spent working during occupational therapy services sessions. Fourth, registered behavior technicians were not paid for work performed during speech therapy services sessions. Finally, Hopebridge failed to pay RBTs for all work they performed after the scheduled end of their shifts. If you have any questions or would like more information about the registered behavior technician unpaid overtime case against Hopebridge, please contact our office for a free, confidential consultation.

Unpaid Overtime Lawsuit Against The Sygma Network

Our unpaid overtime lawyers have filed an unpaid overtime case The SYGMA Network, Inc. (“SYGMA”) related to its failure to compensate its warehouse employees for pre-shift and post-shift job duties as well as interrupted (or shortened) meal breaks which resulted in unpaid overtime for the warehouse employees. The allegations include that SYGMA required its warehouse employees to arrive at the facility early in order to don certain personal protective equipment (“PPE”), gather their equipment for the day, and engage in other pre-shift job duties. The allegations further state that SYGMA warehouse employees’ meal breaks were regularly interrupted by job duties, including needing to doff and don PPE during the meal breaks, that did not allow them to be completely relieved of their job duties for a full 30 minutes. Lastly, the allegations state SYGMA warehouse employees are required to clock out of work at the end of their shift and then doff their PPE and return their equipment. The lawsuit alleges that these employees were not properly compensated for overtime wages at one and one half times their regular rate of pay for overtime work they performed. If you have any questions or would like more information about this case, please contact our office for a free, confidential consultation.

Contact Coffman Legal Today

+ =