SAN DIEGO — Joe’s Crab Shack managers will have a second chance at their claims against the company after a successful appeal of the California trial court’s decision in their case. The managers at California Joe’s Crab Shacks claimed the company misclassified their positions as exempt from overtime pay. The lower court denied the managers’ request for class certification in their class action overtime pay lawsuit. The denial should have ended the plaintiffs’ claims against the company. But with the appeals court’s recent decision, the managers’ claim has been revived and received conditional certification of the proposed class.
The Claims Beginning
In September 2007, Roberto Martinez filed a lawsuit against the restaurant. He attempted to represent the current class, but the court determined he was not sufficiently representative of all of the managers in the proposed class. At that time, three additional plaintiffs joined the claim. The court then allowed the four plaintiffs to represent all managers, from senior kitchen managers to general managers, in California Joe’s Crab Shacks. The managers allege Ignite Restaurant Group Inc., the owner of the restaurant chain, required them to work overtime but did not pay overtime wages for the work. They also claim the company misclassified the managers as exempt despite the fact the managers performed nonexempt tasks during the majority of the time. Additionally, the managers typically did not receive rest or meal breaks as they were needed to fill in for bussers, kitchen staff, and cooks.
The Denial and Appeal
Nearly five years after the initial filing, in May 2012, a California court judge denied class certification and ruled that a class action would be impractical as each class member would need individual inquiry to determine damages. These individual issues would presumably outweigh the common issues, the misclassification and denial of overtime, alleged in the class action. However, in November 2013, the California Court of Appeals reversed the lower court’s denial and indicated that, if necessary, certain class members could be either excluded or grouped as a subclass.
The appeals court’s decision was based on a California Supreme Court ruling in a separate case related to the misclassification of U.S. Bank employees. Applying the U.S. Bank ruling to this claim, the court concluded that it must look at the classification of the employees’ tasks and the employer’s realistic expectations, not the specific, individual tasks the employees performed, exempt or nonexempt. The appeals court believes focusing on and analyzing the policies and practices and their effects on the employees will likely make the resolution process more efficient and practical as a class action.
If you believe you have been misclassified as exempt from overtime pay, contact our knowledgeable team of overtime pay lawyers today at (855) 754-2795 to discuss your situation. Or you can complete the Free Unpaid Overtime Case Review form and our experienced legal team will evaluate your case. If we accept your case, we will represent you under our No Fee Promise which means there are no legal fees or costs unless you receive a settlement.