Labor And Employment Law

In a major resolution for California labor rights, World Financial Group (WFG) agreed to a $65 million settlement to resolve long-standing allegations of worker misclassification. The lawsuit, spearheaded by Tricia Yeomans, represented a class of approximately 25,000 associates who claimed the insurance giant treated them as employees while denying them basic legal protections. The Plaintiffs argued that under California’s "ABC test," WFG exercised excessive control over their work methods and corporate policy adherence. By labeling them independent contractors, the company allegedly avoided paying minimum wages, overtime, and business expenses. After nearly seven years of litigation and extensive discovery, Judge Christine Van Aken approved the settlement in early 2025, providing significant recovery for unpaid wages and PAGA penalties.

Demetrius Watson filed a class-action lawsuit against Radin Logistics LLC, alleging the company systematically violated California labor laws. Watson, an hourly employee, claimed that the logistics firm failed to provide mandatory meal and rest periods, neglected to pay earned overtime wages, and required staff to use personal cell phones for work without reimbursement. The complaint described these actions as a broader corporate strategy to minimize costs at the expense of worker rights. To avoid the complexities of a prolonged trial, Radin Logistics agreed to a $120,000 settlement to compensate Watson and other affected "aggrieved employees" for unpaid wages and statutory penalties.

After 17 years of loyal service, DaRon Benson returned to work at S.E. Combined Services of California following a two-year medical leave, only to face immediate hostility and systemic targeting. His supervisor, Yuri Sikkema, allegedly stripped Benson of long-held benefits and subjected him to racial animus, claiming the company had functioned perfectly without him. The dispute culminated in Benson’s termination based on what the jury determined were sham allegations of timecard fraud. On November 19, 2025, an Alameda County jury held the defendants accountable for discrimination and retaliation, awarding Benson a landmark $13,655,263 for his economic losses and the profound emotional distress caused by the loss of his career.

In Gzim Kovacevic v. Pure Wafer, Inc., a non-exempt employee filed a representative action under the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) alleging systemic labor violations at a Santa Clara County facility. The lawsuit claimed that Pure Wafer required staff to undergo mandatory, off-the-clock COVID-19 screenings before shifts without compensation. Additionally, the Plaintiff alleged that the company failed to provide duty-free meal and rest periods or pay the required premium wages for interrupted breaks. Following the filing of the complaint in the Superior Court of California, the parties resolved the matter through a settlement of $225,585, covering unpaid wages and statutory penalties for the aggrieved workforce.

A Middlesex County jury delivered a defense verdict in favor of Sage Dining Services, Inc., ending a legal challenge brought by former Food Service Director Timothy Jones. Jones had alleged that the company terminated his employment in December 2022 as direct retaliation for his efforts to report sexual harassment involving a district manager. While the plaintiff argued that his firing occurred immediately after he escalated these concerns to Human Resources, the defense maintained that all employment decisions were made in good faith for legitimate business reasons. After reviewing the evidence, the jury found that Jones did not meet the burden of proof required for a retaliation claim under Connecticut law, resulting in a total victory for the employer.

Jorge Solis Flores, a former employee of the renowned apple juice manufacturer S. Martinelli & Company, spearheaded a class-action lawsuit that exposed systemic payroll failures within the historic California brand. The litigation alleged that Martinelli failed to include performance bonuses and shift differentials when calculating the "regular rate of pay" for overtime and sick leave, a common but illegal practice that shortchanges hourly workers. Furthermore, the suit claimed that employees were frequently denied their legally mandated meal and rest periods without receiving the required premium pay. Facing a class of hundreds of current and former workers, Martinelli ultimately agreed to a $1,650,000 settlement to resolve the claims of labor code violations and unfair business practices. This recovery ensures that workers are retroactively compensated for the wages and penalties they were denied during their service to the company.

The legal battle centered on Steve Ongele, a long-serving Bureau Chief within the Los Angeles Department of Building and Safety (LADBS). Ongele alleged that his career ended in retaliation after he blew the whistle on significant financial irregularities within the department. Specifically, Ongele had reported that the city was collecting millions of dollars in excessive fees from the public and had uncovered a scheme where ineligible high-level employees received years of unauthorized overtime pay. Following these disclosures, Ongele claimed he faced a hostile work environment and was ultimately terminated in October 2019. The resulting stress led to a severe decline in his mental and physical health, including suicidal ideation and permanent disability. While the City maintained that the termination was performance-based, they ultimately chose to settle the matter for $3.15 million shortly before trial, following the federal conviction of Ongele's former supervisor on unrelated corruption charges.

The University of San Francisco finalized a $3.8 million settlement to resolve claims that the institution systematically underpaid its non-exempt workforce. Former employees Dan Beck and Bienvenida Salazar led the class action, alleging the university had failed to calculate overtime rates correctly and denied staff mandatory rest periods. After years of legal maneuvering in San Francisco Superior Court, Judge Ethan P. Schulman approved the multimillion-dollar payout to compensate hundreds of affected workers for lost wages and legal penalties.

In March 2024, Michelle Hedges filed a class action lawsuit against Bona Fide Mao Inc. (doing business as Salud) in the Superior Court of California, County of San Francisco. The litigation followed a severe cybersecurity incident occurring in September 2022, which compromised the sensitive personal and medical data of thousands of individuals. The core of the complaint alleged that Salud failed to implement industry-standard security measures—such as robust encryption—and significantly delayed notifying victims. Although the breach was discovered in late 2022, notification letters were not dispatched until February 2024, leaving victims unaware of their exposure for nearly eighteen months. The stolen data included Social Security numbers, medical histories, and health insurance details, placing class members at a lifelong risk of identity theft. To resolve claims of negligence and privacy invasion, Salud agreed to an $8,000,000 settlement. During a final approval hearing on November 20, 2024, the Honorable Ethan P. Schulman requested additional data regarding the class participation rate before granting final judgment. The proceedings reflect a growing judicial scrutiny over corporate accountability in the wake of "Private Information" (PI) exposure.

The Alameda County Superior Court formally concluded the class and representative action Oscar Armando Maravilla v. East Bay Logistics, Inc. with the final approval of a settlement totaling $455,000. The lawsuit began in July 2022 when Mr. Maravilla, a former non-exempt employee, asserted that the East Bay logistics company had systematically violated the California Labor Code. The complaint detailed widespread wage and hour infractions, including the company's failure to accurately track and pay employees for all time they had worked, leading to underpayment of both minimum wage and overtime. The legal action further contended that East Bay Logistics had denied workers their legally mandated meal and rest periods, and subsequently failed to pay the premium wages required for these missed breaks. Additionally, the company provided employees with inaccurate wage statements and neglected to reimburse them for necessary business expenses, such as the use of personal cell phones for work. East Bay Logistics denied the allegations, asserting that it had operated in good faith. However, to avoid the considerable risk and expense of a jury trial, the parties negotiated the six-figure settlement. In September 2024, Judge Michael Markman approved the final order, which provided compensation to the class members for the wages and penalties the company had failed to pay, officially concluding the litigation.

On April 17, 2025, the Los Angeles County Superior Court granted final approval for a class action settlement between plaintiffs Marina Durham and Cassandra Hall-LePrevost and defendant Steak 48 Beverly Hills, LLC. The litigation, which consolidated two separate complaints, alleged that the high-end dining establishment engaged in systematic labor violations, including the failure to authorize required rest periods and meal breaks, and the failure to pay minimum and overtime wages for all hours worked. The plaintiffs, representing a class of non-exempt employees who worked at the restaurant between November 20, 2019, and June 27, 2024, also claimed the employer failed to reimburse business expenses related to uniform cleaning and provided inaccurate wage statements. Under the terms of the agreement, Steak 48 will pay a Gross Settlement Amount of $252,000 to resolve the claims without admitting liability. The settlement also includes $25,000 in PAGA penalties and attorney fees for class counsel.

The Los Angeles County Superior Court finalized a $440,000 class action settlement in Nelson Miranda v. CA Glatt Mart, Inc. The lawsuit alleged that the supermarket operator systematically violated the California Labor Code by failing to provide proper minimum wage, overtime, accurate wage statements, and legally mandated meal and rest periods to hundreds of non-exempt, hourly-paid employees. The compromise concluded two years of litigation, providing financial relief to the class members for lost wages and statutory penalties.