SPACE
The putative class consists of approximately 177 current and former employees. The Class Members’ job duties consist of all aspects of leasing and financing of Hyundai automobiles. Plaintiff alleges that he was misclassified as exempt in his job title as Retail Credit Analyst. Further, Plaintiff alleges that he regularly missed meal periods during his shifts and, even when he was able to take a meal break, his break was often interrupted by a call and he was encouraged to eat at his desk.
SPACEHyundai has denied and continues to deny the allegations of the Complaint and steadfastly maintains that each of the job titles (non-exempt and exempt) were properly classified and compensated. Defendants have asserted and continue to assert defenses to this Action and have expressly denied and continue to deny any wrongdoing or legal liability arising out of the Action. Neither the Settlement, nor any action taken to carry out the Settlement, is, may be construed as, or may be used as an admission, concession, indication, by or against Defendant or anyone else of any fault, wrongdoing, or liability whatsoever.
SPACEDiscovery, Investigation of Facts, and Mediation
SPACEInvestigation efforts into this case have been ongoing, long before and after the filing of the Complaint. As indicated, Mr. Le is a current employee of Hyundai and has worked there consistently since February 2006. He was able to provide counsel with considerable information as to what Credit Analysts did, as well as other finance related positions, how Defendant’s time keeping records were maintained, and how they were compensated.
SPACEThrough formal and informal discovery, Defendant produced a sampling of data. As part of the exchange of information, Defendant produced a sampling of data of 24 Credit Analysts as well as average hourly pay and employment data from the remaining employee population. For the Credit Analysts, data has been provided for the selected employees’ entire tenure, and identifies each employee’s position, pay stubs and other related documents. Finally, counsel examined a CD containing the Time Audit Report for each selected employee. Counsel also calculated the average hourly rates and average number of shifts for all employees from 2005 to the present. In sum, counsel reviewed more than 3,000 pages of information and data. More than 20,000 lines of data were analyzed. Other data collection included interviews of more than 20 putative class members and examination of punch cards and corresponding payroll records of current and former employees.
SPACEThis exchange of information, and the analysis of that information, allowed the parties to meaningfully assess the viability of Plaintiff’s claims and Hyundai’s affirmative defenses and to realistically evaluate the probability of class certification in order to participate in an informed, productive mediation. In the course of that process, considerable information has been uncovered that supports the class settlement.
SPACEMediation with Gig Kyriacou, Esq.
SPACEAfter preparing a detailed mediation brief and damage model, Plaintiff’s counsel attended mediation with Mr. Gig Kyriacou, Esq. in Los Angeles on December 7, 2010. Hyundai representatives and their defense counsel, Adam Levin and Emma Luevano, of Mitchell Silberberg, & Knupp, LLP, also submitted a detailed mediation brief and maintained that the facts did not lend this case to either class certification or any considerable substantive merit.
SPACEAfter a full day of mediation, a settlement endorsed by the mediator was placed on the table as a balance between the Defendant’s desire to avoid protracted litigation and the clear possibility of liability for the putative class. The settlement was for a maximum payment of $340,000. Both sides agreed to the Settlement. The class and representative action allegations concerned the failure of Defendants to pay wages including overtime compensation, to provide meal periods, to provide rest periods, to provide itemized statements, to pay all expenses and commission due, to pay wages upon termination of employment as well as unlawful competition and business practices. The case only involves workers in California.
SPACEThe class settlement checks were mailed out December 7, 2011. The settlement checks will be valid for 90 days from issuance. Once the checks expire, any unclaimed funds will escheat to the State Controller’s Office of unclaimed property where the funds will be held until claimed by the class member.
SPACEThis blog is for informational purposes about the class action lawsuit.
SPACEIf you have any questions regarding this case please contact:
SPACERichard E. Quintilone II, Esq.
Quintilone & Associates 22974 El Toro Road, Suite 100
Lake Forest, CA 92630-4961
Telephone: 949.458.9675
Facsimile: 949.458.9679
Email: Req@Quintlaw.Com
SPACE
Becca J. Jacoby
Legal Assistant Email: Bjj@Quintlaw.com
SPACE
Web: www.quintlaw.com
SPACE
California employers are prohibited from retaliating against employees who participate in wage and hour complaints or investigations. If you feel you have been retaliated against, please contact the California Department of Industrial Relations, Division of Labor Standards Enforcement for information.
SPACE
SPACEFor additional information on the hearing dates or to examine the file in the case you can go online to http://www.occourts.org/online-services/case-access/
No comments:
Post a Comment