CA Glatt Mart Settles $440K Wage & Hour Class Action

Case Background

A legal dispute centered on workplace compliance in California came to a definitive resolution when the Los Angeles County Superior Court finalized a significant class action settlement. This lawsuit, filed by former employee Nelson Miranda, accused the supermarket operator, CA Glatt Mart, Inc., of systematically violating California’s strict wage and hour laws over a period of several years.

The lawsuit represented hundreds of individuals all current and former non-exempt, hourly-paid employees of CA Glatt Mart, Inc. who worked for the company during the designated class period. The core of the complaint alleged that the retailer failed to adhere to fundamental regulations governing working hours, break periods, and employee pay documentation.

Cause

Plaintiff Nelson Miranda, acting on behalf of the entire class, asserted that CA Glatt Mart, Inc. maintained labor practices that deprived employees of legally mandated wages and compensation. The claims included multiple violations under the California Labor Code and the Unfair Competition Law.

Injury

The alleged injury extended across the entire class, encompassing several areas of compensation governed by state law:

1. Lost Wages and Overtime: Employees claimed they did not receive full and proper payment for hours worked, including minimum wage and overtime compensation, despite working more than eight hours in a day or forty hours in a week, as required by California law.

2. Missed Break Premiums: The company reportedly failed to provide proper meal and rest periods, necessitating penalty payments, or "premium wages," for the missed breaks.

3. Inaccurate Documentation: Workers claimed their wage statements were inaccurate, failing to clearly detail essential pay information such as total hours worked, applicable pay rates, and compensation for penalties, making it difficult for them to verify their earnings.

4. Late Final Wages: Upon termination, employees allegedly did not receive their final paychecks on time, subjecting the company to waiting time penalties.

5. Unreimbursed Expenses: Employees claimed the company did not reimburse them for necessary business expenses they incurred while performing their job duties.

Damages Sought

The Plaintiff sought damages to cover all earned but unpaid wages, including minimum and overtime pay, plus liquidated damages for those violations. The suit also demanded compensation for all missed meal and rest periods, statutory penalties for inaccurate wage statements and late final payments, and restitution under the state's unfair business practices law. Crucially, the Plaintiff also sought civil penalties on behalf of the State of California under the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA), a mechanism that allows employees to recover civil penalties for Labor Code violations.

Key Arguments and Proceedings

Nelson Miranda originally filed the complaint in April 2022. The case progressed through the Los Angeles Superior Court, facing the inherent procedural complexities of class action litigation. The process involved extensive legal discovery and data analysis, typical of large-scale wage-and-hour disputes, to quantify the alleged impact across the hundreds of employees involved.

Legal Representation

Plaintiff(s): Nelson Miranda (Individual and Class Representative)

·       Counsel for Plaintiff(s): David D. Bibiyan | Diego Aviles | Robert Payaslyan

Defendant(s): CA Glatt Mart, Inc.

·       Counsel for Defendant(s): Philip J. Azzara | Kyley S. Chelwick | Azzara Philip Joseph

Key Arguments or Remarks by Counsel

Claims

Plaintiff’s counsel argued that the evidence demonstrated a pattern of non-compliance, where the company systematically failed to implement and enforce proper timekeeping and payroll practices. This failure, they contended, resulted in pervasive wage violations for non-exempt employees. The heart of the argument established that these were not isolated incidents but rather the result of corporate policy or negligence that negatively affected the entire workforce uniformly. They maintained that the employees were entitled to the full range of back pay, premium wages, and statutory penalties established by California law to protect workers.

Defense

CA Glatt Mart, Inc. vigorously denied all allegations. Defense counsel asserted that the company had consistently operated in good faith, maintaining proper wage and hour policies and fulfilling all legal obligations to its employees. They argued that any potential discrepancies in pay or documentation were due to administrative errors or individual employee behavior rather than systemic corporate failure. By filing an answer and affirmative defenses, the Defense put forward arguments that they paid all due wages, that the claims were time-barred by the statute of limitations, and that they acted without malice or willfulness.

Settlement

After two years of litigation, including a motion for final settlement approval, the parties averted a protracted trial and reached a compromise.

On the basis of the negotiated agreement, the Los Angeles Superior Court granted final approval of the class and representative action settlement. The Court ruled that the settlement amount of $440,000 constituted a fair and reasonable resolution given the significant risk and expense associated with continuing to litigate the complex labor law claims against a denial of liability by the Defendant.

The total settlement fund provided compensation to the Class Members for their alleged damages, covered administrative costs, paid the Plaintiff’s attorneys' fees, and included civil penalty payments to the California Labor and Workforce Development Agency (LWDA) for the PAGA component of the lawsuit.

With the Court’s judgment entered, the case closed, providing financial relief to the hundreds of workers who participated in the class action and concluding the dispute over CA Glatt Mart’s past wage and hour practices.

Court documents are available upon request at jurimatic@exlitem.com