Sarelson Law Firm

Before the Bachelor: Class Action Lawsuits Based on Racial Discrimination

May 4th, 2012

ABC is the latest target of a high profile class action lawsuit rooted in racial discrimination. The plaintiffs, Nathaniel Claybrooks and Christopher Johnson, allege that the network is guilty of racial discrimination by never featuring a person of color in the combined 21 seasons of reality shows The Bachelor and The Bachelorette. They also claim that their auditions (both are African Americans) were shorter than average. ABC says that the allegations are “baseless and without merit.”

The Bachelor lawsuit is not the first high profile class action suit to feature racial discrimination:

  • Denny’s

Denny’s paid a $54 million settlement in 1995. The chain was sued for denying service, providing lesser service or charging extra fees to African-American customers. Some were asked to pay in advance. After paying the settlement, Denny’s created a racial sensitivity program for employees and featured more diverse actors in its commercials.

  • Abercrombie & Fitch

A 2004 lawsuit accused the clothing retailer of hiring a predominately white workforce for sales and modeling positions while placing minorities in less visible roles. Abercrombie & Fitch agreed to pay a $40 million settlement, hire up to 25 diversity recruiters, hire a vice president of diversity and create more racially diverse marketing materials.

  • U.S. Department of Agriculture

A group of 400 African-American farmers – representing thousands more – sued the U.S. Department of Agriculture for racial discrimination in 1999. The suit claims that African-American farmers were denied farm loans due to their race. The case gained notoriety when a group of senators, including then-Senator Barack Obama, lifted certain requirements to allow more farmers to join as plaintiffs in 2008. One email claimed that the $1.25 billion settlement was slated to go to 86,000 African-American farmers when only 39,697 existed during the years specified in the suit. The government explained that a farm can be in the names of multiple people and the census forms had multiple, misleading titles for those who work on a farm. The submission for claims to receive part of the settlement ends on May 11, 2012.

Sarelson Law FirmMiami class action attorneys

Class Action Lawsuit: ATMs Unusable for Blind People

May 2nd, 2012

Several ATMs in Pennsylvania are in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, alleges a recent string of class action lawsuits.

Robert Jahoda has filed class action lawsuits against 10 separate banks because they do not have adequate instructions for blind people, including voice guidance and instructions in Braille.

Banks were supposed to update their ATMs to be fully accessible by blind people by March 15. Jahoda, who is blind, and a driver visited several ATMs after that deadline passed and found that many had not implemented the necessary adjustments.

According to the suits, the machines are “inaccessible because they use computer screen text prompts that are undetectable to blind people to guide consumers through banking transactions. These computer screen text prompts are not translated into a medium accessible to the blind, such as audio output.”

The first lawsuit was filed on March 26, 11 days after the deadline for making the adjustments had passed. The new regulations, formed in part by bankers, were approved in September 2010.

Two of the banks, PNC and Citizens Bank of Pennsylvania, say that they are already complying with the standards. The others say that they are currently working on making the adjustments.

Banks have a responsibility to make their facilities accessible to everyone. Considering that they had a year and a half to implement these new features, there is no reason not to have these measures in place.

Sarelson Law FirmMiami class action lawyers

More Employees Suing Employers for Back Overtime Pay

April 30th, 2012

For years, employers have used a variety of tactics to cut back on paying their employees overtime wages. Now they are paying the price as a surge of class action lawsuits flood into courtrooms. Compared to 2008, 2011 had a 32 percent increase of employees suing their employers for unpaid overtime.

Some employers, like supermarket chain Publix, used the fluctuating workweek or “Chinese Overtime” payment system. In this system, employers pay employees the same rate every week regardless of hours worked, except for overtime. When overtime kicks in, the rate drops to half the hourly rate.

The fluctuating workweek payment schedule is legal as long as certain conditions are met. The former general managers suing Publix argues that that system of payment was not appropriate for their position. They filed a class action lawsuit against the supermarket chain for lost wages under this system and for not properly calculating bonuses into the managers’ overtime.

Overtime payment is at the heart of another class action lawsuit, this one involving sales representatives from the pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline. The sales reps allege that they deserve overtime for working an extra 10 to 20 hours a week, but the company says that sales positions are exempt from overtime due to the Fair Labor Standards Act. Unlike most sales representatives, however, pharmaceutical salespeople do not receive a commission when they make a sale. The case, currently under review by the Supreme Court, will have a ruling by June 30, 2012.

Other methods used by employers to skirt overtime included forcing workers to work off the clock and misclassifying fulltime employees as tax-free independent contractors.

Times are tough and money is tight for several businesses, but that is no excuse for treating employees unfairly. The recent influx of unpaid overtime lawsuits will continue until employers properly classify and compensate their employees.

Sarelson Law FirmMiami class action attorneys