or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple hit with class action lawsuit over alleged labor violations, more than 20K plaintiffs involved
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple hit with class action lawsuit over alleged labor violations, more than 20K plaintiffs involved

post #1 of 56
Thread Starter 
A lawsuit being leveled against Apple was granted class certification on Monday, alleging the company's treatment of Apple Store and corporate operations employees constitute multiple California Labor Code violations.

Apple Store Staff


Apple was first accused of violating California's labor laws in 2011 by four employees who claim the company did not provide adequate break time, meal time and paychecks on a timely basis, reports TechCrunch.

Most recently, plaintiffs were granted class status, meaning the scope of the case widened substantially and now includes more than 20,000 current and former employees. Lawyers estimated the class to contain about 18,000 member, but attorney for the plaintiffs Tyler Belong said, "The class size continued to grow as the case continued on and time passed due to employee turn over. It is now over 20,000."

The publication obtained a statement from Belong, who summarized the case:

The lawsuit was filed by Brandon Felczer and several other retail and corporate Apple employees (the "Plaintiffs") beginning in December 2011. The Plaintiffs sought to represent themselves and all other similarly situated Apple employees in California who were not provided timely meal breaks, timely rest breaks, and timely final paychecks according to California's Labor Code and Wage Orders. Just yesterday, after years of litigation, against Apple's opposition, and after voluminous briefing and lengthy oral argument, the California Superior Court granted Plaintiffs' motion and certified the case as a class action, appointing Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs' counsel (Hogue & Belong) as the class representatives and class counsel on behalf of approximately 20,000 Apple employees. In other words, as of yesterday's ruling, Apple now faces claims of meal period, rest period and final pay violations affecting approximately 20,000 current and former Apple employees.



The class is still deciding on remedial monetary demands, though counsel is asking for damages and restitution of all monies due to plaintiffs from unlawful business practices as pursuant to ten California Labor Code sections. As usual, interest accrued and applicable attorneys' fees are also being sought. Apple has yet to make a statement on the matter.

Embedded below is a copy of the most recent amended complaint, which was filed in October of last year.

post #2 of 56
Fer chrissakes...

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #3 of 56
"Timely last pay checks". LOL. What, it took an extra two weeks to process your last f****** paycheck?

Windows survivor - after a long, epic and painful struggle. Very long AAPL

Reply

Windows survivor - after a long, epic and painful struggle. Very long AAPL

Reply
post #4 of 56

More "than" 20K plaintiffs....

post #5 of 56
"As usual, interest accrued and applicable attorneys' fees are also being sought."

Of course the lawyers will get a bunch more than the employees. None of the issues seem to be over what they got paid, only how quickly. As for breaks, how do you put a dollar figure on these? 20K employees, some of which sound like they no longer work at an Apple Store (final paychecks), doesn't sound like a lot of money but when you factor in the lawyers costs, it will be huge.
post #6 of 56
Must have made them work for more than half an hour without a two hour break.
post #7 of 56
20k is a lot. Is it most of them.
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #8 of 56
MORE THEN
post #9 of 56
Originally Posted by WoodWorks View Post

Geez. Does anyone on the Internet make it past sixth grade?

 

That’s what they teach in 6th grade now? Geez, things have gone downhill.

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #10 of 56

Personally, I'm glad to live in a state, and, less markedly, a country, that tries to protect the humanity of workers.

But, I'd be pretty surprised to find that a particularly large fraction of Apple's people felt taken advantage of,

or wanted to actively join the class…or that it will be proven that there was willful disregard on Apple's part.

So many of the things they do, here and abroad, including in places they don't strictly have to,

show a very active concern for their people, so, even given the difficulties

inherent in running extremely busy - even chaotic - retail establishments, this just seems out of character for Apple,

and I'll be interested to see what kind of legs - if any - this actually has.

post #11 of 56

Oh my GOD.   They had to work 5 straight hours without a meal break.   Oh the humanity!

post #12 of 56
Originally Posted by john12345 View Post
Oh my GOD.   They had to work 5 straight hours without a meal break.   Oh the humanity!


California, huh. Sure it’s not France?

 

“Thanks, Jay Leno.”

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #13 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by john12345 View Post

Oh my GOD.   They had to work 5 straight hours without a meal break.   Oh the humanity!

Most if not all state labor laws require a meal break after 4 hours.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #14 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

Most if not all state labor laws require a meal break after 4 hours.

Delaware requires at least 30 minutes but break must be after first 2 hours and before last 2 hours fora. 8 hour day
Quite reasonable
post #15 of 56

Where are those Foxbots we were promised? Time to start replacing store employees.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #16 of 56
Been working for Apple Retail for almost 8 years now, not once had a problem with getting meal breaks. Anytime I was late getting my break was due to me not managing my time.
post #17 of 56

319a148b-e969-40e6-94b5-d190bdad822b?imageType=ws_icon_large

post #18 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by frxntier View Post

MORE THEN

The correct usage is "more than", not "more then", unless you want to say something like "more people liked Apple products in the 80's, more then than now" (and that's pushing it!).

As for the suit, do you want to work without breaks?

I don't know whose right, but I have faith in the justice system. (Sorry, couldn't write that without stopping to laugh!)
post #19 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred1 View Post


The correct usage is "more than", not "more then", unless you want to say something like "more people liked Apple products in the 80's, more then than now" (and that's pushing it!).

As for the suit, do you want to work without breaks?

I don't know whose right, but I have faith in the justice system. (Sorry, couldn't write that without stopping to laugh!)

Well, if we're going to get all pedantic here, the correct usage is: "I don't know who's right...," not "whose." Who's is a contraction of "who is," "whose" implies ownership.

post #20 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by WoodWorks View Post

More "than" 20K plaintiffs....

Geez. Does anyone on the Internet make it past sixth grade?
"More than" is correct, is it not? "More then" would be a comment on a timeframe, I believe.
post #21 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by WoodWorks View Post

Well, if we're going to get all pedantic here, the correct usage is: "I don't know who's right...," not "whose." Who's is a contraction of "who is," "whose" implies ownership.
Lol, you were writing this as I was finishing up mine and didn't see this until I pushed the "reply" button. As a sidenote, I sometimes wonder how many spelling or grammar errors posted on the internet are due to autocorrect?
post #22 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlashFan207 View Post


"More than" is correct, is it not? "More then" would be a comment on a timeframe, I believe.

Yes, it is. The original post (which since has been corrected) was "more THEN."

post #23 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by WoodWorks View Post

Yes, it is. The original post (which since has been corrected) was "more THEN."
Ah, that's why. That's sneaky. Thanks for the explanation.
post #24 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by john12345 View Post
 

Oh my GOD.   They had to work 5 straight hours without a meal break.   Oh the humanity!

lots of crybabies out there.  i used to be a MB mechanic- do you think i could just stop working on a car for thirty minutes every two hours? the only people i know who complain about hours usually show up late, take all their breaks and leave early are the lazy ones, and typically in a union.

how many waiters/waitresses take a 30 minute every two hours?

 

but i do feel bad for people working at the apple store. you have to pay for the shirts, wear that super heavy plastic identifier/card holder, lug around a useless heavy iPad/iphone/ipod, pace around a dirty empty store with no a/c in the dark in the most vile conditions with old outdated software and machines littering every table longing to work at a microsoft store.

 

and most people love to sign up for a class action lawsuit. they get to do nothing and get $50 in the mail.

post #25 of 56
I was preparing a longer post but unfortunately it will have to wait. I need a rest break first.
post #26 of 56
Nice to see people attacking the alleged victims. If Apple the alleged perpetrator were not complying with the law then they justifiably should be fined and procedures put in place to stop it happening again.
post #27 of 56
'Victims'. To use the word 'victims' in this context is an insult to those who ARE victims.

If you're in the middle of a sale, you just can't suddenly leave saying, "sorry it's my break time, can you hang on half an hour, why not play a little solitaire on this wonderful iMac you're trying to purchase?" Or "sorry, it's my break time can you repeat to my colleague here, who will be glad to help you as long as it doesn't cut into her break time too, what you're interested in buying?"

I can understand strict adherence to break times for those doing manual labour, but for those standing around, talking, often leaning against tables? 'Victim' is NOT the word!
post #28 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by WoodWorks View Post

Well, if we're going to get all pedantic here, the correct usage is: "I don't know who's right...," not "whose." Who's is a contraction of "who is," "whose" implies ownership.

Yes, of course your right. Oops! I mean you're rite. Oh man . . . !!
post #29 of 56
It seems none of the above have ever worked retail.
post #30 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by pembroke View Post

'Victims'. To use the word 'victims' in this context is an insult to those who ARE victims.

If you're in the middle of a sale, you just can't suddenly leave saying, "sorry it's my break time, can you hang on half an hour, why not play a little solitaire on this wonderful iMac you're trying to purchase?" Or "sorry, it's my break time can you repeat to my colleague here, who will be glad to help you as long as it doesn't cut into her break time too, what you're interested in buying?"

I can understand strict adherence to break times for those doing manual labour, but for those standing around, talking, often leaning against tables? 'Victim' is NOT the word!
So your saying if it's retail. Companies can ignore the labour laws. :what:
post #31 of 56
This case is silly...likely just another act of lawyers hoping to extract a piece of the settlement action from big corporations
post #32 of 56
Apple's still got money! Sue them! People who were fired by a company could not possibly have any vindictive motives whatsoever, and I'm sure that all 20,000 people in that state who work for them feel the same way.
post #33 of 56
Originally Posted by singularity View Post
Nice to see people attacking the alleged victims.

 

Because they’re alleged by themselves to be victims.

 
If Apple... ... were not complying with the law then they justifiably should be fined and procedures put in place to stop it happening again.

 

And... your point is what? No one has said otherwise.

 

Originally Posted by singularity View Post
So your saying if it's retail. Companies can ignore the labour laws. :what:

 

Has there been a more pathetic strawman as of late?

 

And no, you can’t reply to me at all. I am a victim, you see, because I say so, and therefore cannot be rebutted¡

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #34 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Originally Posted by singularity View Post
Nice to see people attacking the alleged victims.

 

Because they’re alleged by themselves to be victims.

 
If Apple... ... were not complying with the law then they justifiably should be fined and procedures put in place to stop it happening again.

 

And... your point is what? No one has said otherwise.

 

Originally Posted by singularity View Post
So your saying if it's retail. Companies can ignore the labour laws. :what:

 

Has there been a more pathetic strawman as of late?

 

And no, you can’t reply to me at all. I am a victim, you see, because I say so, and therefore cannot be rebutted¡

Lol good reply. Made me chuckle.

The point I'm making (badly) is whilst a law is on the statue books you have to comply. If any company disregards their legal obligation they deserve to be punished. It doesn't matter if your Apple, Walmart etc. Some of the posters in this thread seem (to me) are takin the opinion that Apple are innocent (of everything) therefore anyone taking legal action are scumbags.

What this lawsuit will establish is whether Apple are guilty or not (assuming the legal system is fair.... A big assumption I know!).

I know from experience that what can start out as full compliance can over a period of time slowly falls into non compliance all due to people trying to do the right thing or speed things up. Some companies I've worked for have had to pay out big money because of it (big in this case means $10 million plus).
post #35 of 56
Originally Posted by singularity View Post
Some of the posters in this thread seem (to me) are takin the opinion that Apple are innocent (of everything) therefore anyone taking legal action are scumbags.

 

Hey, Crowley! (or whoever it was I said this to. Maybe the other guy. Or that other guy.) YOU SEE WHAT I MEAN? It is NEVER brought up by ANYONE but the offendee. It is NEVER said by people who take the other side of the argument.

 

You’re seeing people take Apple’s side because Apple isn’t wrong. The suit is being brought by whiny, lazy bums. Were Apple using slave labor, I can’t imagine anyone taking their side.

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #36 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Hey, Crowley! (or whoever it was I said this to. Maybe the other guy. Or that other guy.) YOU SEE WHAT I MEAN? It is NEVER brought up by ANYONE but the offendee. It is NEVER said by people who take the other side of the argument.

You’re seeing people take Apple’s side because Apple isn’t wrong. The suit is being brought by whiny, lazy bums. Were Apple using slave labor, I can’t imagine anyone taking their side.

Then Apple needs to do a better job hiring because 20,000+ lazy mofos is a lot.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #37 of 56
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post
Then Apple needs to do a better job hiring because 20,000+ lazy mofos is a lot.

 

How odd that a system bred on entitlement would generated the entitled...

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #38 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

How odd that a system bred on entitlement would generated the entitled...

That comes from an entire generation of bad parenting. Fulfilling a child's every desire in the long run is a bad idea.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #39 of 56
Part of signing off on my reporting of hours has me ascertaining that I took my California state mandated breaks.

I am sure that some employees have been inconvenienced by finishing up transactions in the retail stores, and some managers are casual about break times. I doubt that there is wide spread abuse of these issues. Personally, working for other companies I was irritated when I was in the middle of something (or almost finished) and was told to take a break to meet labor laws.

I find it interesting to see the issue of last paychecks as part of the class action - appears to me that the whole suit is more about employees leaving the company trying to maximize their exit package.
post #40 of 56

As person who has gone into a number of apple store and have gotten support for them, I can see why they may not get timely breaks. There has been a few time when they were trouble shooting a problem I was in a for a few hours and the person stay with us the entire time or was jumping back and forth between people help them. Now imagine if someone was helping you and they said sorry it is may break and walked away. 

 

I am glad they stayed until the problem was solve, that is great customer service.

 

I had this happen to me in a grocery story a few times and I was not happen the cashier just said they were leaving and someone would be there to help because it was their break time.

 

If these people want timely breaks and stuff go work a union shop and see how well they goes.

 

It also appears a majority of these people are not longer working for Apple so either they realize it was not the place for them and left which is their right, or the were left go because they did not do what they need to earn their paycheck, either ways they just crybabies


Edited by Maestro64 - 7/23/14 at 11:53am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple hit with class action lawsuit over alleged labor violations, more than 20K plaintiffs involved