Category Archives: Employment Practices Liability

by | February 22, 2013 · 6:54 am

Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Restaurant Owners Increasingly Targeted With EEOC Lawsuits Over “Family Medical Leave Act” Liability; Employees Who Use Up “Available Paid Sick Leave” Assert Disability Rights

“…Previously, if an employee had exhausted all twelve weeks of FMLA leave and any other available leave, they could be terminated without employer liability…however, the EEOC recently has taken the position that Paid Sick Leave In Hospitality Industryonce leave is exhausted under the FMLA, this can trigger an employer’s affirmative duty to provide a reasonable accommodation  to an employee’s disability, which can include providing additional leave..”

For 2013, food service employers can expect a continued aggressive approach from the Equal Empoyments Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) as to violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) in the restaurant industry.  The significant increase of ADA charges and lawsuits by the EEOC and private claimants, which began in early 2012, shows little sign of abating in the new year.

Back in 2008, Congress passed the Americans with Disabilities Act Amendment Act (“ADAAA”), which was intended to counter a series of U.S. Supreme Court decisions that significantly limited employees’ ability to assert and prevail in disability lawsuits.  Under the ADAAA, and the EEOC’s final regulations, approved in 2011, the definition of what constitutes a disability was significantly broadened.  As a result, employees who previously would not have been considered disabledEEOC under the ADA, now fall under its statutory protections.  Prior to the amended Act, employers could often prevail in litigation on the basis of whether the employee actually was considered disabled under the narrow interpretations of the Supreme Court decisions.  With the new broad definition, most cases now hinge on whether the employer reasonably accommodated the employee’s disability..

One source of increased litigation and attention from the EEOC is when the ADA intersects with the Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”) as to leave for a serious medical condition.   Under this scenario, employees who were terminated after exhausting FMLA leave are asserting EEOC Charges and filing lawsuits under the ADA.  Employers are also being forced to agree to high dollar settlements with the EEOC to avoid the prospect of the federal agency filing suit on behalf of employees and former employees.

For more:  http://www.bluemaumau.org/surge_ada_disability_lawsuits_continue_2013_restaurant_and_food_service_employers_crosshairs

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Restaurant Owners Increasingly Targeted With EEOC Lawsuits Over “Family Medical Leave Act” Liability; Employees Who Use Up “Available Paid Sick Leave” Assert Disability Rights

Filed under Employment Practices Liability, Health, Insurance, Labor Issues, Liability, Management And Ownership, Risk Management

Tagged as , , , , , ,

by | February 8, 2013 · 7:52 am

Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: New York Restaurant Sued By Former Delivery Workers For Deducting Money To Pay For “Online Order Service Fees”

“…the judge (stated) that tip deductions “were only permissible to the extent that they ‘did not enrich [the employer], but instead, at most, merely restored it to the approximate financial posture it would have occupied Hospitality Industry Lawsuitif it had not undertaken to collect credit card tips for its employees…the restaurant unlawfully retained almost $17,000 and compared the practice to passing on the cost of rent or materials to delivery workers…”

A lawsuit brought by former delivery workers against an Upper West Side restaurant that deducted money from their tips to pay the service fees of food-delivery Web sites can proceed, a federal judge has ruled. The ruling came in a suit filed against Indus Valley, on Broadway at West 100th Street, where eight former delivery workers say the restaurant kept 12 to 15 percent of their tips when customers placed their orders through services like Seamless and Grubhub.com.

Indus Valley sought to have the suit dismissed. It admitted to withholding the workers’ tips but said the practice was permissible to recoup fees charged by online delivery sites, in the same way that restaurants are allowed to deduct a percentage from tips left via credit card to cover credit card companies’ fees for converting those tips to cash.

But the judge, Alison J. Nathan of United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, rejected both Indus Valley’s argument and its request to dismiss the suit. A representative from Indus Valley declined to comment.

The service agreements with the delivery Web sites included charges for commissions and “advertisement fees,” in addition to  credit card processing fees. The agreements, Judge Nathan wrote, “suggest that Indus Valley deducted from gratuities costs beyond those incurred as the result of converting credit card gratuities to cash.”

A lawyer for the workers, Jane Chung, said that labor law bars restaurants from taking from workers’ tips without an explicit exemption, and said that the judge’s ruling effectively declares Indus Valley’s practice illegal.

For more:  http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/05/restaurant-loses-effort-to-have-ex-delivery-workers-suit-dismissed/

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: New York Restaurant Sued By Former Delivery Workers For Deducting Money To Pay For “Online Order Service Fees”

Filed under Employment Practices Liability, Labor Issues, Liability, Management And Ownership

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

by | February 6, 2013 · 8:11 am

Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Louisiana Hotel Sued By Lobby Concierge For “Age Discrimination”

“…she was terminated in June 2012 from her position as a lobby concierge. At the time of her termination, she Hospitality Industry Lawsuitwas 53 years old…the plaintiff is asking for an award of damages for loss of pay, pain and suffering, mental anguish and distress, medical expenses, interest, and attorney’s fees…”

A former Ritz-Carlton concierge has filed an age discrimination lawsuit claiming she was terminated from her position due to her age and not because she left her shift two hours earlier than scheduled. Claudette Breve filed suit against The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Co. on Jan. 11 in federal court in New Orleans.

Breve began working at the Marriott Hotel in New Orleans in February 1998 and transferred to the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in September  2000.

According to the court record, the defendant states it terminated Breve from her position because she violated hotel policies by leaving work early without the authorization of her supervisor. In response, Breve admits she left her shift early and states that she had arranged for another concierge to cover her shift. The other concierge failed to complete Breve’s shift and the replacement concierge arrived late for a shift. Breve and the person she arranged to complete her shift were fired over the incident, court documents state.

The defendant is accused violating the Age Discrimination in Employment Act.

For more:  http://louisianarecord.com/news/248884-ritz-carlton-concierge-files-age-discrimination-lawsuit-after-termination

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Louisiana Hotel Sued By Lobby Concierge For “Age Discrimination”

Filed under Employment Practices Liability, Insurance, Labor Issues, Liability, Management And Ownership, Risk Management

Tagged as , , , ,

by | February 4, 2013 · 10:16 am

Hospitality Industry Business Risks: Hotel And Restaurant Companies Must Make Plans For “Natural Disasters” That Comply With Federal Employment And Safety Laws

“…Employers only have to pay em­­ployees for hours actually worked, unless they have a collective bargaining agreement or contractual arrangement that says otherwise. Normally, employees are not entitled to pay for Coastal Floodingwork that was scheduled, but did not occur because of the disaster…Floods and other natural disasters may bring allergens and pollutants to the workplace, triggering possible ADA accommodations. Employees may need time off under the FMLA…”

When Hurricane Sandy roared up the East Coast in October, it brought immense destruction to heavily populated areas. Similarly, the June 2012 derecho storm that tore through the Midwest and Mid-Atlantic produced destructive winds and at least one tornado. People in the Midwest and the South are still dealing with prolonged drought.

All brought business to at least a temporary standstill. Employers must be prepared for a variety of disaster scenarios. And while they focus on getting up and running again, they must still comply with federal em­­ploy­­ment laws.

THE LAW: The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) sets strict wage-and-hour requirements for paying employees—regardless of how high the water rises. Floods and other natural disasters may bring allergens and pollutants to the workplace, triggering possible ADA accommodations. Employees may need time off under the FMLA.

Employers that must clean up their facilities may face hazards requiring worker protections under the Occupational Safety and Health Act.

WHAT’S NEW: In the wake of Hur­­ricane Sandy, the U.S. Depart­­ment of Labor has launched a disaster pre­­paredness page with guidance and contact information for both employers and employees.

Additionally, OSHA provides count­­less resources on handling flood and cleanup hazards in its Fact Sheet on Natural Disaster Recovery.

HOW TO COMPLY: Employers must deal with two very practical matters in the aftermath of a natural disaster: workplace cleanup and paying workers. Federal law affects both.

Cleaning up

A major disaster changes the workplace’s entire environment. Power may be out, gas lines may have ruptured, overhead electrical wires may be dangling. All can be deadly.

Cleanup is hard work. OSHA ad­­vises cleanup crews to use good lifting techniques and take frequent breaks. When lifting heavy objects, employees should work in teams so no one has to lift more than 50 pounds alone.

Make first aid kits readily available. Provide training so employees know how to prevent infection by cleaning and protecting cuts and abrasions. Pro­­tective clothing should include watertight boots with steel toes and insoles, long pants, safety glasses and a hard hat if there’s a danger of falling debris.

If cleanup crews encounter mold, they should wear respirators approved by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.

When handling hazardous chemicals, employees must follow specific instructions for protective clothing.

When moving ladders or scaffolds, make sure employees know to watch for low-hanging power lines. When connecting generators to active power systems, instruct them to shut down and lock main breakers to prevent energizing outside power lines on which utility workers may be working. Have expert electricians inspect lines that are damaged or submerged.

Similarly, if anyone detects a gas leak, ensure they know to evacuate the building and notify utility crews.

FLSA issues

Natural disasters can wreak havoc on payroll operations. Maintain redundant systems to avoid losing payroll records and preserve the ability to issue paychecks. Many payroll companies offer cloud or offsite storage of wage-and-hour data so even if your facility is damaged or destroyed, existing payroll information is preserved.

Generally, employers must meet regularly scheduled paydays, but disasters have a way of upsetting normal routines. Employers that anticipate having difficulty meeting payroll should contact the DOL’s Wage and Hour Divi­­sion at (866) 4USWAGE (487-9243) for guidance.

For more:  http://www.businessmanagementdaily.com/34280/disaster-averted-make-emergency-preparedness-part-of-your-job

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Business Risks: Hotel And Restaurant Companies Must Make Plans For “Natural Disasters” That Comply With Federal Employment And Safety Laws

Filed under Claims, Employment Practices Liability, Insurance, Labor Issues, Management And Ownership, Risk Management, Training

Tagged as , , , , , ,

by | February 1, 2013 · 7:45 am

Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: New York Hotel Settles Federal Class-Action Lawsuit For $550,000; “Service And Grutuity Charge” Not Paid To Workers

“…alleged that guests were not told that service charge was part of their bills. The amount of charge varied, depending on the service…in the dining room, standard meals were charged at a certain amount per diner Hospitality Industry Class Action Lawsuitswhether it was $5 or $8 or whatever, per meal, and also that the lodging charges were per night…”

Leatherstocking Corp., owner of the Otesaga Resort Hotel in Cooperstown, has agreed to pay a $550,000 settlement in a federal class-action lawsuit brought by service workers, largely over the distribution of service-charge proceeds. The workers alleged in the suit filed in Albany in 2010 that the hotel’s actions violated New York labor law the federal Fair Labor Standards Act.

The lawsuit also alleged violations of overtime and minimum-wage standards, but the bulk of the case focused on a “service/gratuity” charge that the hotel charged guests and restaurant patrons, according to court papers.

According to court documents, the hotel insisted that it properly distributed all of the service-charge money to employees. The dispute centered on which employees were paid, according to the documents.

The plaintiffs contended that management employees who were not legally entitled to a share of the payments nonetheless received them, while the hotel countered that that all of the people it paid were entitled to a share of the money.

For more:  http://thedailystar.com/localnews/x1746084500/Otesaga-pays-550-000-to-settle-lawsuit

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: New York Hotel Settles Federal Class-Action Lawsuit For $550,000; “Service And Grutuity Charge” Not Paid To Workers

Filed under Employment Practices Liability, Insurance, Labor Issues, Liability, Management And Ownership, Risk Management

Tagged as , , , , ,

by | January 23, 2013 · 8:11 am

Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Texas Restaurant Group Settles EEOC “Religious Discrimination Lawsuit” For $25,000; Female Employee Prevented From Wearing Skirt To Work

“…Fries Restaurant Management has  agreed to pay Ashanti McShan $20,000 for “mental anguish and non-wage damages” and an additional $5,000 in lost wages…The restaurant management company also EEOCagreed to post its policy against religious discrimination on employee bulletin boards in every Burger King it operates in the state of Texas…”

A Burger King in Texas has agreed to pay $25,000 to a Pentecostal womanwho wore a skirt to work, court documents state. The payment settles a lawsuit filed in August by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) against Fries Restaurant Management, LLC, which owns and operates the Burger King in Grand Prairie, Texas. The store allegedly asked a teenage woman to leave work after she arrived in a skirt. The EEOC’s lawsuit against Fries alleged religious discrimination, which is a violation of Title VII of the Civil Right Act of 1964.

In addition, it vowed to hold trainings for managers on federal anti-discrimination laws for the next two years, according to the documents.

McShan was a senior in high school when she came to work at the Burger King wearing a skirt instead of the black pants that are part of Burger King’s uniform.

In August 2010, McShan asked to wear a skirt instead of the restaurant’s uniform pants. Burger King “assured her that she could wear a skirt to work,” the filing says.

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Texas Restaurant Group Settles EEOC “Religious Discrimination Lawsuit” For $25,000; Female Employee Prevented From Wearing Skirt To Work

Filed under Employment Practices Liability, Insurance, Labor Issues, Liability, Management And Ownership, Training

Tagged as , , , , ,

by | January 12, 2013 · 7:49 am

Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Restaurant Franchisee Settles EEOC “Sexual Harassment And Retaliation Lawsuit” For $2.5 Million; Managers Made Working Conditions Intolerable

The EEOC’s suit charged that Carrols subjected a class of women – including many teenagers – to egregious sexual harassment at Burger King locations throughout the Midwest, Southeast, and Northeast. EEOC alleged that the harassment, which ranged from obscene comments, jokes, and propositions to unwanted touching, EEOCexposure of genitalia, strip searches, stalking, and even rape, was perpetrated by managers in the majority of cases. According to the EEOC, Carrols also retaliated against some of the women by cutting their hours, manufacturing discipline against them, and even firing them, while it forced more women to quit because the harassment made their working conditions intolerable.

Carrols Corporation, the world’s largest Burger King franchisee, will pay $2.5 million and take significant remedial steps to settle a sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit brought by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the agency announced today. The lawsuit alleged discrimination against 89 female employees around the country, many of whom were teenagers when they worked for Carrols.

Sexual harassment and retaliation for complaining about it violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The EEOC filed suit (Civil Action No. 98-cv-01772 FWS/TWD in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York) after first attempting to reach a voluntary settlement.

Under the terms of the publicly-filed consent decree resolving the case, Carrols will pay $2.5 million in compensatory damages and lost wages to the 89 victims. It also will implement a number of measures to increase employees’ awareness of Carrols’ anti-harassment policies and to improve Carrols’ response to complaints brought forward under those policies. Those measures include enhanced training for Carrols’ managers in preventing and responding to harassment; improved mechanisms for tracking harassment complaints; notices posted in all domestic Carrols Burger King locations informing employees about the lawsuit’s resolution and their rights under federal anti-discrimination laws; and an injunction prohibiting further harassment and retaliation.

For more: http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/1-9-13.cfm

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Restaurant Franchisee Settles EEOC “Sexual Harassment And Retaliation Lawsuit” For $2.5 Million; Managers Made Working Conditions Intolerable

Filed under Employment Practices Liability, Insurance, Labor Issues, Liability, Management And Ownership, Risk Management

Tagged as , , , , , ,

by | January 9, 2013 · 7:34 am

Hospitality Industry Employment Risks: Maryland Restaurant Settles EEOC “Disability Discrimination And Retaliation Lawsuit” For $47,000; Deaf Prep Cook Was Harassed And Mocked

“…(the plaintiff) was harassed by a former management official because of his disability, through mockery (e.g. being called “vermin” instead of “Vernon”), and through threatening physical conduct…(his) prep cook EEOCduties were removed and that he was transferred to a dishwasher position because of his disability….In addition to the $47,814 in monetary relief to Davis, the two-year consent decree resolving the lawsuit enjoins McCormick and Schmick’s from violating the ADA, including with regard to harassment and retaliation…”

McCormick & Schmick’s Seafood Restaurant, Inc. will pay $47,814 and provide other relief to settle a disability discrimination and retaliation lawsuit filed by the U.S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the agency announced today.

According to the EEOC’s suit, Vernon Davis, who has been deaf since childhood and uses American Sign Language and reads lips to communicate, satisfactorily performed his duties as a prep cook at the McCormick & Schmick’s National Harbor restaurant in Oxon Hill, Md. Prior to being hired by the defendant, Davis had obtained culinary training and had worked in several other restaurants.

After Davis and others complained about Davis being subjected to disability discrimination, the restaurant demoted him to a janitorial-type position and cut his hours because of his disability and in retaliation for the complaints, the EEOC charged. Four months later, McCormick and Schmick’s unlawfully fired Davis because of his disability and in retaliation for his complaints, the EEOC alleged in its lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, Southern Division, Civil Action No. 8:11-cv-02695.

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Employment Risks: Maryland Restaurant Settles EEOC “Disability Discrimination And Retaliation Lawsuit” For $47,000; Deaf Prep Cook Was Harassed And Mocked

Filed under Employment Practices Liability, Labor Issues, Liability, Management And Ownership, Training

Tagged as , , , , , ,

by | January 2, 2013 · 8:35 am

Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: California Hotel Faces Class-Action Lawsuit Over “Fixed Percentage Withholdings” From Room Service Tips; Violation Of California Labor Law

“…(plaintiff) claims the hotel pools the tips of its room service delivery staff and withholds a fixed percentage of them…the withholdings, which have been standard policy since at least 2003, violate California labor Hospitality Industry Class Action Lawsuitslaw…he seeks compensatory and exemplary damages for unfair competition, conversion and money had and received…”

Hyatt Hotels and the Manchester Financial Group steal workers’ tips to cover “glass breakage,” whether employees have broken any glasses or not, a class action claims in Superior Court. Former room service delivery worker Leonardo Acosta sued Host Hotels and Resorts, Manchester Financial Group and Hyatt Hotels Corp.

“Hyatt and the other defendants maintain that the monies are withheld pursuant to Hyatt’s policy of reimbursing themselves for purported ‘glass breakage.’ The same percentage of gratuities was withheld from all room service delivery workers in plaintiffs’ tip pool, without regard to the amount of breakage, if any, during any pay period.

The same percentage of gratuities was withheld from all room service delivery workers in plaintiffs’ tip pool, without regard to whether any purported breakage was caused by any dishonest or willful act, or by the gross negligence of any employee … [and] without regard to the individual, if any, responsible for the alleged breakage,” Acosta claims.

For more:  http://www.courthousenews.com/2013/01/02/53536.htm

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: California Hotel Faces Class-Action Lawsuit Over “Fixed Percentage Withholdings” From Room Service Tips; Violation Of California Labor Law

Filed under Employment Practices Liability, Labor Issues, Liability, Management And Ownership, Risk Management

Tagged as , , , , , ,

by | December 26, 2012 · 6:57 am

Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Workplace Discrimination Lawsuits Increase As Companies Employ "Ethnically Diverse Labor Force"; Hotel Worker Mocked For His "Accent" Awarded $500,000 Settlement

Earlier this year, an Iraqi hotel worker in Phoenix won a $500,000 settlement from the Four Points Sheraton. EEOCHe claimed his co-workers mocked his accent and called him derogatory names. According to the EEOC, the worker’s managers didn’t take his complaints seriously, which made his workplace situation intolerable.

Workplace discrimination complaints based on national origin, including those involving language ability, increased by 76 percent from 1997 to 2011, according to the EEOC. The agency says the trend reflects a more ethnically diverse labor force.

Civil rights advocates say workplaces have become more hostile toward workers who don’t speak perfect English.

“There’s definitely a climate of fear that’s bad for everyone,” John Mejia, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), told Insurance Journal.

Some workers have won large settlements in accent-related lawsuits.

For more:  http://www.insidecounsel.com/2012/12/26/accent-related-discrimination-suits-on-the-rise-sa

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Workplace Discrimination Lawsuits Increase As Companies Employ "Ethnically Diverse Labor Force"; Hotel Worker Mocked For His "Accent" Awarded $500,000 Settlement

Filed under Claims, Employment Practices Liability, Labor Issues, Liability, Management And Ownership, Risk Management, Training

Tagged as , , , , ,