Category Archives: Labor Issues

by | November 22, 2012 · 7:19 am

Hospitality Industry Workers' Compensation Insurance Risks: Tennessee Supreme Court Awards Restaurant Manager Benefits At "Six Times His Medical Impairment" From Electrocution Injuries

“…The Tennessee Supreme Court held that a manager was entitled to benefits at the statutory maximum of six times his medical impairment…the manager was denied a meaningful return to work when he was terminated in retaliation for filing his claim. The manager’s age, education, training, work experience, and limitations warranted the six-times multiplier…”

A co-manager for a fast food restaurant was repairing a heating element used to keep food warm. Someone plugged the heating element into an electrical outlet. An electrical shock caused the manager to lose consciousness. He suffered from burns on his hands, chest pains, headaches, and memory loss. He repeatedly asked his supervisor to pay his medical expenses and authorize medical care for his symptoms. The district manager said he would “take care of it,” but the bills remained unpaid. The manager filed a workers’ compensation claim, and the restaurant was fined for failing to timely report the incident. Days after the claim was filed, his supervisor “vulgarly expressed his anger” about the claim. Within weeks, the manager, who had never received a reprimand, received two reprimands and was later terminated.

A neurologist diagnosed the manager with a migraine condition and epilepsy and opined that the conditions were caused by the electrical shock. The neurologist found that he reached maximum medical improvement with a 10 percent impairment to the body as a whole. A vocational expert opined that the manager suffered a 65 percent vocational disability based on his age, limitations, work history, and the local labor market. The manager was unable to find gainful employment other than occasional “odd jobs.” The Tennessee Supreme Court held that he was entitled to benefits at the statutory maximum of six times his medical impairment.

The court rejected the restaurant’s argument that the maximum multiplier possible was meant to punish it for mishandling the claim rather than an assessment of disability.

For more:  http://www.riskandinsurance.com/story.jsp?storyId=533352818

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Workers' Compensation Insurance Risks: Tennessee Supreme Court Awards Restaurant Manager Benefits At "Six Times His Medical Impairment" From Electrocution Injuries

Filed under Claims, Injuries, Insurance, Labor Issues, Liability, Management And Ownership, Risk Management

Tagged as , , , , , ,

by | November 21, 2012 · 7:15 am

Hospitality Industry Employment Risks: Hotel "Off-Duty Access Policies" Cannot Be At "Management Unlimited Discretion" According To National Labor Relations Board (NRLB) Decision

In a 2-1 decision, the (National Labor Relations Board) struck down a Marriott property’s policy prohibiting off-duty employees from accessing the hotel property without a manager’s approval. In doing so, the board evaluated Marriott’s rule in light of well-established case law dating back four decades.

Many hotels maintain off-duty access policies that limit but do not prohibit employees from accessing the hotel property during off-duty hours. The policy might require an employee to obtain advance permission from management and/or limit access to employer-sponsored events. Such a policy seems reasonable.

The hotel or resort might want to grant access to employees as an employee benefit. Employee discounts, access to restaurants, golf courses, spa facilities and ski slopes, for example, are valuable employee benefits. Of course, the hotel needs to balance legitimate business concerns, such as maintaining the security of its premises and guests, as well as assuring its guests have ready access to facilities.

Under that 1976 case, the NLRB established a three-part test for whether off-duty access restrictions are legal. For an off-duty access rule to be valid under that test, the policy must:

1) limit access only to the interior of the facility and other working areas;

2) be clearly disseminated to employees; and

3) apply to any off-duty employee seeking access for any reason and not just those engaging in union activity.

In the Marriott case, issued 28 September, the board held that because the rule was not a uniform ban on access but instead gave management unlimited discretion to determine when to permit access, it could lead employees to believe they could not engage in union organizing or other protected activity without a manager’s approval. The board struck down the rule as unlawful and said a “narrow, extremely specific” off-duty access rule might be deemed valid. However, it provided no guidance as to what type of rule is acceptable.

This decision puts hospitality employers in an untenable position. The hotel has one of three options:

1) adopt a policy limiting all off-duty access, even for legitimate reasons such as picking up a paycheck or attending special events;

2) grant employees access to the property without any restrictions; or

3) prepare a policy with narrow exceptions for special circumstances and hope the policy survives legal scrutiny.

For more:  http://www.hotelnewsnow.com/Articles.aspx/9417/NLRBs-decisions-impacts-hotel-policies

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Employment Risks: Hotel "Off-Duty Access Policies" Cannot Be At "Management Unlimited Discretion" According To National Labor Relations Board (NRLB) Decision

Filed under Labor Issues, Liability, Management And Ownership, Risk Management, Training

Tagged as , , , , , ,

by | November 20, 2012 · 7:22 am

Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Colorado-Based Restaurant Group Will Defend Itself Against Class-Action Lawsuit Alleging Overtime Violations; Company Maintains That Managerial Salaried Employees Are "Apprentices"

“…The class-action complaint…says Chipotle misclassified its “apprentices” as managerial salaried employees who don’t qualify for overtime pay. The suit contends apprentices earn salaries of $40,000 but frequently work more than 40 hours a week and often perform the duties of hourly workers, including cooking and filling orders…”

Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc. says a lawsuit alleging the Colorado- based company has failed to pay overtime to hundreds of employees is frivolous.

Chipotle spokesman Chris Arnold said the restaurant chain carefully defines the roles in its restaurants and that the apprentice position is “clearly” a managerial role ineligible for overtime, under state and federal laws.

The lawsuit seeks back pay and damages. Chipotle has about 1,350 restaurants.

For more:  http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/west/2012/11/19/271081.htm

2 Comments

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

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,

by | November 19, 2012 · 7:26 am

Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Michigan Hotel Sued By EEOC For "Terminating Pregnant Housekeeper"; Employers May Not Exclude Pregnant Women Based On Their "Concerns About Safety Of Unborn Child"

“…Ramin fired a housekeeper shortly after it learned of her pregnancy. The company stated that it could not allow her to continue to work as a housekeeper because of the potential harm to the development of her baby…”

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) filed a lawsuit today charging that Ramin, Inc., a Comfort Inn & Suites franchise owner in Taylor, Mich., violated federal law when it terminated a pregnant housekeeper because of her pregnancy.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended by the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, protects female employees against discrimination based on pregnancy, and the Supreme Court has expressly rejected the notion that an employer may exclude pregnant women from employment based on its own concerns about the safety of the unborn child.

The EEOC seeks injunctive relief to prevent Ramin from discriminating against pregnant employees or applicants in the future, as well as monetary relief on behalf of the victim.  The EEOC filed suit after first attempting to settle the case through its conciliation process.

“Pregnancy discrimination is rarely subtle,” said Lauren Gibbs Burstein, attorney in the EEOC’s Detroit Field Office.  “Employers may not bar pregnant employees from work because of outdated myths or stereotypes.  The EEOC will vigorously defend the rights of pregnant workers to provide for their families by remaining employed.”

For more:  http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/11-13-12c.cfm

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Michigan Hotel Sued By EEOC For "Terminating Pregnant Housekeeper"; Employers May Not Exclude Pregnant Women Based On Their "Concerns About Safety Of Unborn Child"

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

Tagged as , , , , ,

by | November 14, 2012 · 7:10 am

Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Kentucky-Based Restaurant Group Faces "Telephone Consumer Protection Act" Class-Action Lawsuit For "Unsolicited Text Message Advertising"

“…each alleged violation of the act, which consists of a brand sending an unsolicited advertisement via phone call or text message without prior consent, carries up to $500 in statutory damages…text messages allegedly were sent to thousands of Papa John’s customers without their consent because OnTime4U obtained the cell phone numbers of customers from the implicated franchisees…”


A U.S. District Court judge in Seattle has certified a class-action lawsuit against Papa John’s International Inc., calling for as much as $250 million in damages for the alleged transmission of 500,000 text messages to consumers who claim they did not consent to receive such texts.

Three named Papa John’s customers and potentially many more are suing the Louisville, Ky.-based operator or franchisor of 4,000 Papa John’s Pizza restaurants for allegedly violating the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.

The lawsuit, first filed in February by Washington state resident Maria Agne, stems from text messages Agne claims she received without her consent in April 2010. The texts, which promoted Papa John’s products and offers, allegedly came from marketing services provider OnTime4U, which had contracted with several Papa John’s franchisees in the Pacific Northwest.

OnTime4U allegedly indicated to the franchisees — who operate as many as 21 Seattle-area units in Rain City’s case and 12 Portland, Ore.-area restaurants in Rose City’s case — that those messages would not be considered spam or violate the TCPA because those customers had previously ordered a pizza from the franchisees, establishing an “existing business relationship,” which exempts calls and texts from oversight of the TCPA.

According to Coughenour’s order, Kevin Sonneborn, franchisee of PJ Sound Pizza LLC, testified that customers were not asked for their permission to send text messages before their phone numbers were given to OnTime4U.

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Kentucky-Based Restaurant Group Faces "Telephone Consumer Protection Act" Class-Action Lawsuit For "Unsolicited Text Message Advertising"

Filed under Guest Issues, Labor Issues, Liability, Management And Ownership, Risk Management

Tagged as , , ,

by | November 11, 2012 · 7:36 am

Hospitality Industry Fire Risks: New York Restaurant Kitchen Workers Seriously Burned As "Gasoline Stored In Container" Spills And Ignites

“…the sushi chef… had asked a dishwasher to carry a five-gallon soy sauce container filled with gasoline through the kitchen to his car…The gasoline (had been acquired) a day earlier from an acquaintance and had been stored in the restaurant’s basement…as the dishwasher was carrying the gasoline through the kitchen, it spilled and ignited. Another chef was immediately engulfed in fire, receiving first- and second-degree burns to his face, neck, arms and legs before bystanders extinguished the flames…”

A sushi chef has been arrested after a soy sauce container he had filled with gasoline ignited at a restaurant close to Sutton Place in Manhattan, starting a blaze that severely injured three people.

The fire, which occurred about 10 p.m. Friday, raced through the kitchen of Eno Asian Bistro and Lounge on 1066 First Avenue at East 58th Street, the Fire Department said.

A busboy and another woman also sustained second- and third-degree burns to their legs. As of Saturday, the victims were still recovering at NewYork-Presbyterian/Weill Cornell Medical Center.

For more:  http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/10/chef-charged-in-fire-at-restaurant/

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Fire Risks: New York Restaurant Kitchen Workers Seriously Burned As "Gasoline Stored In Container" Spills And Ignites

Filed under Fire, Insurance, Labor Issues, Liability, Maintenance, Risk Management

Tagged as , , , , ,

by | November 10, 2012 · 7:57 am

Hospitality Industry Employee Risks: California Hotel Settles "Sexual Harassment And Retaliation Lawsuit" With EEOC For $195,000

In 2010, a female employee filed the EEOC charge of discrimination alleging that a male supervisor made sexual comments and referenced an image of a sexual nature.  The female employee further alleged that upon reporting the sexual harassment, the male supervisor retaliated against her by issuing written discipline and treating her differently.

DNC Parks & Resorts at Tenaya, Inc. which operates Tenaya Lodge, a hotel and resort near Yosemite National Park in California, will pay $195,000 and furnish other relief to settle a federal charge of sexual harassment and retaliation filed with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the federal agency announced today.

Following an EEOC investigation, the director of EEOC’s Fresno Local Office determined that there was reasonable cause to believe that the female employee was sexually harassed due to her gender, female, and that she was subjected to retaliation for reporting the harassment, a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.  The EEOC also found reasonable cause to believe that a class of other female employees was also sexually harassed due to gender.  Tenaya Lodge denied the allegations of sexual harassment and retaliation, and the company did not admit to liability while agreeing to settle the matter.

Following the EEOC’s determination, the EEOC entered into a one-year conciliation agreement with Tenaya Lodge and the female employee in question.  The agreement effectively settles the case administratively, thereby avoiding litigation.  The agreement provides for $100,000 in monetary relief for the female employee who filed the EEOC charge.  An additional $95,000 is designated as a class fund for eligible claimants who also encountered sexual harassment and/or retaliation while working at Tenaya Lodge.

Aside from the monetary relief, Tenaya Lodge will provide equal employment opportunity training for all current employees and, thereafter, for all new hires in the language that the employee understands, along with additional training for managerial and human resources staff on how to deal with discrimination, harassment and retaliation.  Tenaya Lodge also agreed to post a notice about the settlement in English and Spanish; to report future instances of discrimination to the EEOC; and to publicize the settlement via press release.

Workers have the right to report sexual harassment or other forms discrimination on the job without negative repercussions,” said Melissa Barrios, director of the EEOC’s Fresno Local Office.  “We commend Tenaya Lodge for working with the Commission to resolve this matter and for agreeing to implement measures to protect their employees from harassment, discrimination and retaliation.”

For more:  http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/11-7-12.cfm

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Employee Risks: California Hotel Settles "Sexual Harassment And Retaliation Lawsuit" With EEOC For $195,000

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

Tagged as , , , , , ,

by | November 5, 2012 · 7:10 am

Hospitality Industry Employment Risks: Hotels And Restaurant Groups Begin Limiting Employee Hours To Below 30 Hours Per Week To Avoid Health-Care Law Requirements

Several restaurants, hotels and retailers have started or are preparing to limit schedules of hourly workers to below 30 hours a week. That is the threshold at which large employers in 2014 would have to offer workers a minimum level of insurance or pay a penalty starting at $2,000 for each worker.

The shift is one of the first significant steps by employers to avoid requirements under the health-care law, and whether the trend continues hinges on Tuesday’s election results. Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney has pledged to overturn the Affordable Care Act, although he would face obstacles doing so.

Pillar Hotels & Resorts this summer began to focus more on hiring part-time workers among its 5,500 employees, after the Supreme Court upheld the health-care overhaul, said Chief Executive Chris Russell. The company has 210 franchise hotels, under the Sheraton, Fairfield Inns, Hampton Inns and Holiday Inns brands.

“The tendency is to say, ‘Let me fill this position with a 40-hour-a-week employee.’ “Mr. Russell said. “I think we have to think differently.”

Pillar offers health insurance to employees who work 32 hours a week or more, but only half take it, and Mr. Russell wants to limit his exposure to rising health-care costs. He said he planned to pursue new segments of the population, such as senior citizens, to find workers willing to accept part-time employment.

He described the shift as a “cultural change” toward hiring more part-timers and not a prohibition against hiring full-timers.

CKE Restaurants Inc., parent of the Carl’s Jr. and Hardee’s burger chains, began two months ago to hire part-time workers to replace full-time employees who left, said Andy Puzder, CEO of the Carpinteria, Calif., company. CKE, which is owned by private-equity firm Apollo Management LP,  offers limited-benefit plans to all restaurant employees, but the federal government won’t allow those policies to be sold starting in 2014 because of low caps on payouts. Mr. Puzder said he has advised Mr. Romney’s campaign on economic issues in an unpaid capacity.

For more:  http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204707104578094941709047834.html

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Employment Risks: Hotels And Restaurant Groups Begin Limiting Employee Hours To Below 30 Hours Per Week To Avoid Health-Care Law Requirements

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

Tagged as , , , , , ,

by | November 3, 2012 · 7:30 am

Hospitality Industry Employment Risks: Hawaiian Restaurant Group Sued By EEOC For "Rampant Sexual Harassment Of Female Employees"

In its lawsuit, the EEOC asserts that a class of at least nine female servers and bartenders were repeatedly bombarded with sexual propositions, explicit sexual remarks, groping, grabbing, and exposure of genital areas by male managers, and even ordered to perform sexual favors for high-level Señor Frog officials. 

Señor Frog’s, a popular chain of Mexican-themed restaurants and bars, violated federal law by allowing the rampant sexual harassment of its female employees in Honolulu by high-level officials including the company owner, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) charged in a lawsuit it filed today against both Señor Frog’s and Altres, Inc.  Altres, a Hawaiian staffing company, was contracted by Señor Frog’s to provide human resources services and oversee the company’s non-management staff at the Señor Frog’s restaurant & bar in Honolulu.

The widespread sexual harassment was out of control, stemming from Señor Frog’s owner himself, who permitted other Honolulu restaurant managers and supervisors to do the same, according to the EEOC.  Women were also treated differently with respect to being passed over for promotions, obtaining less favorable shifts and earning less than their male counterparts.

The EEOC contends that at least one of the victims was compelled to quit as a result, while others were disciplined or had their hours cut in retaliation for complaining of the harassment and discrimination.  As the joint employer, the EEOC claims that Altres is also liable for the hostile work environment endured by the Señor Frog’s staff, many of whom were employed by Altres on paper, according to company records.

Such alleged conduct violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  The EEOC filed suit (EEOC v. La Rana Hawaii, LLC dba Señor Frog’s & Altres, Inc., Case No. CV-11-00799 LEK BMK) after first attempting to reach a pre-litigation settlement through its conciliation process.  The EEOC’s suit seeks all available relief, including lost wages, front pay and compensatory and punitive damages for the class of women.  Substantial remedies, including policy changes and staff training, are also being sought by the EEOC in order to prevent and appropriately address future instances of sexual harassment, discrimination and retaliation.

For more:  http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/11-2-12.cfm

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Employment Risks: Hawaiian Restaurant Group Sued By EEOC For "Rampant Sexual Harassment Of Female Employees"

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

Tagged as , , , , , ,

by | October 31, 2012 · 6:07 am

Hospitality Industry Safety Risks: Hotel Fined $70,000 After Employee Loses Fingers During "Routine Test Of Emergency Generator Equipment"

“…a Toronto Hilton employee saw a leak during a routine test on the hotel’s emergency generator equipment. As he leaned in to get a better look, his hand slipped into a fan. The fan’s blades cut off his fingers…”

A hotel company has been fined $70,000 after one of its workers lost some of his fingers on the job.

Justice of the Peace Kevin Madigan fined Northstar Hospitality GP Inc., which owns the Hilton hotel, for violating the Occupational Health and Safety Act. Northstar Hospitality pleaded guilty for failing to ensure the generator’s parts were guarded.

The court added a 25 per cent surcharge to the fine, which goes toward a provincial government fund for victims of crimes.

For more:  http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/1279358–hotel-owner-fined-70-000-after-worker-loses-fingers

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Safety Risks: Hotel Fined $70,000 After Employee Loses Fingers During "Routine Test Of Emergency Generator Equipment"

Filed under Injuries, Insurance, Labor Issues, Liability, Maintenance, Management And Ownership, Risk Management

Tagged as , , , , ,