Tag Archives: Hotel Employees

by | June 6, 2012 · 7:47 am

Hospitality Industry Employment Risks: California Hotel Settles "Wage And Hour Lawsuit" For $2.5 Million; Over 400% Increase In Collective Actions Filed Nationally Since 2000

The case included allegations claiming that the hotel failed to pay employees for the time spent preparing for work and putting on and taking off uniforms that were required to be left at the hotel. Workers also alleged that they were required to fill out time sheets saying they took breaks whether they did or not.

The Hilton Hotel near Los Angeles International Airport has agreed to pay its workers $2.5 million to settle a  lawsuit alleging that the hotel withheld wages, did not pay overtime and failed to provide meal and rest breaks to about 1,200 workers, union officials said Tuesday.

The suit, filed in 2008, covers all hourly employees who worked at the hotel at 5711 W. Century Blvd. from 2004 to 2011. With more than 1,230 guest rooms, the Hilton Los Angeles Airport is one of the largest hotels in Los Angeles.

Nationally, more than 7,000 collective actions were filed in federal court in 2011 alleging wage and hour violations under the Fair Labor Standards Act, an approximately 400% increase since 2000.

For more:  http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2012/06/hotel-settlement.html

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Employment Risks: California Hotel Settles "Wage And Hour Lawsuit" For $2.5 Million; Over 400% Increase In Collective Actions Filed Nationally Since 2000

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

Tagged as , , ,

by | June 5, 2012 · 6:26 am

Hospitality Industry Employment Risks: U.S. Justice Dept. Files "Employment Discrimination Lawsuit" Against Nevada Hotel; "Pattern Of Unlawful Eligibility Verification"

“…The suit alleges the property  engaged in a pattern or practice of discrimination in the employment eligibility verification and reverification process…The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) requires employers to treat all authorized workers equally during the hiring, firing and employment eligibility verification process, regardless of their national origin or citizenship status.”

The suit seeks an unspecified fine and “full remedial relief to work-authorized non-U.S. citizen employees for the losses they have suffered, including back pay and reinstatement.”

The U.S. Justice Department is suing the Tuscany Suites & Casino in Las Vegas over allegations the property discriminated against non-U.S. citizen job applicants and employees over a five-year period. The Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division in Washington, D.C., last week announced it filed a lawsuit against the hotel-casino in the Office of the Chief Administrative Hearing Officer of the agency and served  the company on May 29. The complaint alleges:

  • Tuscany treated non-citizens differently from U.S. citizens during the employment eligibility verification and reverification process by requesting non-citizen employees provide more or different documents or information than was required.
  • Tuscany subjected lawful permanent residents to unnecessary reverification procedures based on their citizenship status. These are workers with Permanent Resident Cards (green cards).

The suit says the Tuscany had been hit with a discrimination complaint in early 2011 by an unidentified “charging party,” and that in October the Justice Department’s Office of Special Counsel notified the Tuscany “it was expanding the investigation to include a possible pattern or practice of document abuse against non-U.S. citizens.”

For more:  http://www.vegasinc.com/news/2012/jun/04/justice-department-alleges-las-vegas-casino-discri/

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Employment Risks: U.S. Justice Dept. Files "Employment Discrimination Lawsuit" Against Nevada Hotel; "Pattern Of Unlawful Eligibility Verification"

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

Tagged as , , , , ,

by | May 29, 2012 · 7:13 am

Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Hotel Management Must Review Social Media Policy For Employees To Ensure Restrictions Do Not Violate "NLRB Section 7 Rights"

“…in late February 2012, the NLRB filed a complaint against a group of Hyatt Hotels alleging, among other things, that the restrictions placed on the use of social media, such as admonitions not to comment on hotel properties or locations, or to use the Hyatt brand/logo or photos of the properties, were overboard and discriminatory…”

The NLRB reports expressed concerns regarding attempts by an employer to block — for example — employees from using a company’s trademarked logo in social media. That was considered, generally, to be in violation of an employee’s Section 7 rights.

“Interests protected by trademark laws — such as the trademark holder’s interests in protecting the good reputation associated with the mark from the possibility of being tarnished by inferior merchandise sold by another entity using the trademark and in being able to enter a related commercial field and use its well-established trademark, and the public’s interest in not being misled as to the source of products using confusingly similar marks — are not remotely implicated by employees’ non-commercial use of a name, logo, or other trademark to identify the Employer in the course of engaging in Section 7 activity” (2012 Report).

Yet, such disclaimers are sometimes required by the Federal Trade Commission. In fact, under the revised regulations published by the FTC in 2009, if anyone other than a company or the brand owner itself advertises or talks about the company’s product or service, the FTC requires the disclosure of the relationship between the “talkee” and the “brand,” so that potential consumers understand that the recommendation or information contained in the social-media posting could be biased (See generally 16 C.F.R. §255.)

For more:  http://www.hreonline.com/HRE/story.jsp?storyId=533347702

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Hotel Management Must Review Social Media Policy For Employees To Ensure Restrictions Do Not Violate "NLRB Section 7 Rights"

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

Tagged as , , , , , ,

by | May 26, 2012 · 7:35 am

Hospitality Industry Theft Risks: Former Iowa Hotel Assistant Manager Convicted Of Stealing Money From Guest's Wallet

“…Officers reviewed surveillance footage, which showed a woman picking up towels in the pool area along with the man’s wallet. The pool attendant turned over the wallet to Cole, who then was the assistant manager…the footage showed Cole looking through the wallet, then going into a room that did not have surveillance cameras…”

A former local hotel employee a jury recently found guilty of taking money from a guest, albeit on a lesser misdemeanor offense, will not have a conviction on her record.

Judgment for Misty Marie Cole’s offense of third-degree theft was deferred, and she was placed on probation for one year Monday.
A judge ordered her to pay the $1,000 she took.

Cole, 32, of Danville, was tried earlier this year for second-degree theft, which is a felony that could have netted the woman as many as five years in prison.

For more:  http://www.thehawkeye.com/story/Motel-052512

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Theft Risks: Former Iowa Hotel Assistant Manager Convicted Of Stealing Money From Guest's Wallet

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

Tagged as , , , , ,

by | May 17, 2012 · 6:38 am

Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Nevada Hotel Sued For "Pregnancy Discrimination" By Room Service Sales Employee; Additional "Class-Action" Allegations For Unpaid Wages

In the same filing to sue the hotel for unspecified damages for pregnancy discrimination, Megia also made class-action allegations for unpaid wages on behalf of the hotel’s employees.

“…employees were not permitted to wear their uniforms outside work and had to pick up and drop off their uniforms before and after their shifts, often leading to additional overtime for which they were not paid, the suit claimed…”

Melodee Megia, a former employee at The Cosmopolitan Resort and Casino in Las Vegas, claims she was told she was fired from her job for saying “bye bye” on the telephone instead of “goodbye” while eight-months pregnant.

She has filed a lawsuit against the hotel for pregnancy discrimination and a class-action suit for workers’ wages, saying employees were not paid for the time they had to wait for and change into their uniforms on a daily basis.

Megia worked at the hotel from November 2010 until September 2011, when she said she was fired “based on her pregnancy,” according to court papers filed with the Clark County District Court in Nevada last week.

Megia was a “room service sales” employee answering the telephone when hotel guests called for room service, occasionally assisting in room delivery, her lawyers said.

For more:  http://abcnews.go.com/Business/fired-las-vegas-hotel-worker-sues-pregnancy-discrimination/story?id=16361237

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Nevada Hotel Sued For "Pregnancy Discrimination" By Room Service Sales Employee; Additional "Class-Action" Allegations For Unpaid Wages

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

Tagged as , , , , ,

by | April 24, 2012 · 6:32 am

Hospitality Industry Employment Risks: California Supreme Court Ruling Mandates That State's Hotels And Restaurants Need Only Make Employee "Meal And Rest Periods Available"; Not Required To Ensure "Actually Taken"

The Court makes clear the following: “When someone is … employed … for five hours, an employer is put to a choice: it must (1) afford an off duty meal period; (2) consent to a mutually agreed-upon waiver if one hour or less will end the shift; or (3) obtain written agreement to an on duty meal period if circumstances permit. Failure to do one of these will render the employer liable for premium pay.” Brinker, p. 35.

At issue in Brinker Restaurant Corporation v. Superior Court was whether California employers must ensure that their employees actually take their meal and rest periods or merely make them available. To the collective relief of California employers, the court found that an employer must only provide meal and rest periods to its employees, leaving the employees free to use the period for whatever purpose they desire. The employer is not obligated to ensure no work is performed during the period.

The Court continues: “[a]n employer’s duty with respect to meal breaks … is an obligation to provide a meal period to its employees. The employer satisfies this obligation if it relieves its employees of all duty, relinquishes control over their activities and permits them a reasonable opportunity to take an uninterrupted 30-minute break, and does not impede or discourage them from doing so.” Brinker, Slip Opinion, p. 36 (emphasis added).

The Court further acknowledged that what will suffice may vary from industry to industry, but held, “the employer is not obligated to police meal breaks and ensure no work thereafter is performed. Bona fide relief from duty and the relinquishing of control satisfies the employer’s obligations, and work by a relieved employee during a meal break does not thereby place the employer in violation of its obligations and create liability for premium pay.” Brinker, p. 36-7 (emphasis added).

For more: http://hotellaw.jmbm.com/2012/04/brinker_v_superior_court.html

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Employment Risks: California Supreme Court Ruling Mandates That State's Hotels And Restaurants Need Only Make Employee "Meal And Rest Periods Available"; Not Required To Ensure "Actually Taken"

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

Tagged as , , , , , ,

by | · 6:32 am

Hospitality Industry Employment Risks: California Supreme Court Ruling Mandates That State's Hotels And Restaurants Need Only Make Employee "Meal And Rest Periods Available"; Not Required To Ensure "Actually Taken"

The Court makes clear the following: “When someone is … employed … for five hours, an employer is put to a choice: it must (1) afford an off duty meal period; (2) consent to a mutually agreed-upon waiver if one hour or less will end the shift; or (3) obtain written agreement to an on duty meal period if circumstances permit. Failure to do one of these will render the employer liable for premium pay.” Brinker, p. 35.

At issue in Brinker Restaurant Corporation v. Superior Court was whether California employers must ensure that their employees actually take their meal and rest periods or merely make them available. To the collective relief of California employers, the court found that an employer must only provide meal and rest periods to its employees, leaving the employees free to use the period for whatever purpose they desire. The employer is not obligated to ensure no work is performed during the period.

The Court continues: “[a]n employer’s duty with respect to meal breaks … is an obligation to provide a meal period to its employees. The employer satisfies this obligation if it relieves its employees of all duty, relinquishes control over their activities and permits them a reasonable opportunity to take an uninterrupted 30-minute break, and does not impede or discourage them from doing so.” Brinker, Slip Opinion, p. 36 (emphasis added).

The Court further acknowledged that what will suffice may vary from industry to industry, but held, “the employer is not obligated to police meal breaks and ensure no work thereafter is performed. Bona fide relief from duty and the relinquishing of control satisfies the employer’s obligations, and work by a relieved employee during a meal break does not thereby place the employer in violation of its obligations and create liability for premium pay.” Brinker, p. 36-7 (emphasis added).

For more: http://hotellaw.jmbm.com/2012/04/brinker_v_superior_court.html

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Employment Risks: California Supreme Court Ruling Mandates That State's Hotels And Restaurants Need Only Make Employee "Meal And Rest Periods Available"; Not Required To Ensure "Actually Taken"

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

Tagged as , , , , , ,

by | April 8, 2012 · 7:02 am

Hospitality Industry Theft Risks: Florida Hotel Employee Charged With Stealing $500 Of "Dom Perignon Champagne"; Picture Posting On "Facebook" Leads To Arrest

“…an employee at the hotel discovered pictures on a Facebook page of a former night auditor and a friend holding Dom Perignon champagne bottles with the caption: “Hey, we’re having Dom in the morning!”

The security cameras had been turned off at the time of the theft, according to a subsequent investigation.

A Panama City Beach hotel reported the theft of $500 of Dom Perignon champagne in February after an inventory of supplies showed three bottles were missing, according to a news release from the Bay County Sheriff’s Office.

The hotel manager ID’d the man as Jonathon Appleby, a former night auditor at the hotel. Appleby had access to the cooler with the champagne and to the security cameras while he was employed an investigation determined.

For more:  http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/strange/sfl-champagne-20120408,0,4727820.story

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Theft Risks: Florida Hotel Employee Charged With Stealing $500 Of "Dom Perignon Champagne"; Picture Posting On "Facebook" Leads To Arrest

Filed under Crime, Labor Issues, Liability, Maintenance, Management And Ownership, Risk Management, Theft

Tagged as , , , , ,

by | · 7:02 am

Hospitality Industry Theft Risks: Florida Hotel Employee Charged With Stealing $500 Of "Dom Perignon Champagne"; Picture Posting On "Facebook" Leads To Arrest

“…an employee at the hotel discovered pictures on a Facebook page of a former night auditor and a friend holding Dom Perignon champagne bottles with the caption: “Hey, we’re having Dom in the morning!”

The security cameras had been turned off at the time of the theft, according to a subsequent investigation.

A Panama City Beach hotel reported the theft of $500 of Dom Perignon champagne in February after an inventory of supplies showed three bottles were missing, according to a news release from the Bay County Sheriff’s Office.

The hotel manager ID’d the man as Jonathon Appleby, a former night auditor at the hotel. Appleby had access to the cooler with the champagne and to the security cameras while he was employed an investigation determined.

For more:  http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/strange/sfl-champagne-20120408,0,4727820.story

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Theft Risks: Florida Hotel Employee Charged With Stealing $500 Of "Dom Perignon Champagne"; Picture Posting On "Facebook" Leads To Arrest

Filed under Crime, Labor Issues, Liability, Maintenance, Management And Ownership, Risk Management, Theft

Tagged as , , , , ,

by | March 18, 2012 · 7:56 am

Hospitality Industry Employment Risks: Hotel Management Must Use Consistent Hiring And Firing Procedures To Prevent "Age Discriminiation Lawsuits"

  • Initial screening: Make sure those responsible for selecting interview candidates don’t have access to information about applicants’ race, age, sex or other protected characteristics. That alone will prevent many failure-to-hire claims. HR should take the lead and prepare applicant summaries for hiring managers to screen that contain no tell-tale information about protected characteristics. That may mean even excising names, using a candidate number instead.
  • Who hires and fires: The same individual responsible for the final decision to hire an applicant should also make the decision to fire that individual if necessary. This helps dispel the notion that a protected characteristic like race or age had anything to do with the decision. After all, why would someone hire an applicant who belongs to a protected class then turn around and fire the same person because of her race, sex, age, etc.?
  • Training: Track training to make sure each employee has the opportunity to improve job performance. Note any training offers and the employee’s response.
  • Informal audit: Review your labor pool regularly. Look for patterns that may indicate hiring bias. For example, are all employees in a particular job under age 40? If so, find out why.

For more:  http://www.businessmanagementdaily.com/29524/use-consistent-hiring-firing-processes-to-knock-down-age-discrimination-claims

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Employment Risks: Hotel Management Must Use Consistent Hiring And Firing Procedures To Prevent "Age Discriminiation Lawsuits"

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

Tagged as , ,