LOS ANGELES — A California federal judge recently denied class certification in an overtime lawsuit against Starbucks. Nicole Cummings, a former Starbucks’ barista, initially sought class certification for four separate groups of Starbucks employees. But after the judge denied certification, she has reduced the class to two groups and requested the court to reconsider certification.
The potential class members in the two groups were allegedly denied proper rest breaks in violation of state and federal law. State and federal law require employers provide short, usually less than 20 minutes, rest periods with pay to their employees. Missed or denied meal and rest periods can affect calculations of “hours worked” and overtime pay.
In order for a lawsuit to be certified for class action status the plaintiff must show that there is an overarching policy or pattern of behavior that is applied to all potential class members. The court also needs to see that the circumstances around the misclassification, denied overtime, or denied meal and rest periods affected all, or the vast majority, of the potential class members in similar ways. This is why overtime and wages claims can take significant amounts of time. Discovery and providing sufficient evidence is time intensive. However, these claims also have time limits, or statutes of limitations, which require plaintiffs to file and provide evidence within a specific amount of time. These opposing time constraints can affect class certification efforts.
In Cummings’ initial request she claimed that there was a uniform company policy that failed to provide adequate break periods. However, she only submitted her own statements about the rest breaks, but Starbucks’ provided statements for 10 employees who claim they received adequate breaks. Since Cummings did not prove that the denied breaks were common for all of the thousands of employees in the proposed class, the judge denied her request.
However, in her request to reconsider certification, Cummings asks the court to look at the policy, not the employee statements, in deciding if the policy is in violation. She, also, argues that a group of 10 employees is not enough evidence that Starbucks is not denying proper breaks to its other thousands of employees. If the court grants certification, it would allow Cummings and the other potential class members to gather more evidence for their claims. But while the court considers Cummings’ request, she is concerned that the denial of class certification will lead potential class members to miss the statute of limitations.
If you or someone you know is a Starbucks barista and you believe you have been denied proper rest periods or overtime, it is important to take action now. Call our experienced team of overtime pay lawyers today at (855) 754-2795 or complete the Free Unpaid Overtime Case Review form on the top right of this page and our knowledgeable legal team will evaluate your case.