August 8, 2020

Volume X, Number 221

August 07, 2020

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

August 06, 2020

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

Welcome to the Hotel COVID Lockdown – Seafood Employees Allege Failure to Pay and False Imprisonment

Now in its 10th week and including 177 cases, Barnes & Thornburg LLP’s Wage & Hour Practice Group continues to catalog COVID-19 related workplace complaints filed in courts around the country. The tracker includes new interactive functionality, allowing readers to view a breakdown of the number cases filed in each state and the chronological timeline of when each of these cases was filed organized by topic. As we have mentioned in previous blogs, we continue to see an uptick in workplace class and collective actions directly related to COVID-19, or filings where plaintiffs’ counsel have attempted to tie a class or collective-wide wage and hour violation to the pandemic. Although the number of cases indirectly related to COVID-19 are difficult to quantify, our non-scientific observation is that there has also been a marked increase in wage and hour class and collective action filings, in general, over the last two to three months. 

This week’s spotlight, which further highlights this trend, concerns a putative class action complaint involving seasonal workers, allegations of false imprisonment and violations of the California Labor Code. While the factual bases of this complaint are somewhat unique, the case demonstrates the critical importance of an employer’s ability to quickly react to an evolving situation, with advice from counsel, in order to ensure that wage and hour laws (not to mention common law torts) are not violated. 

In Doe, et al. v. North Pacific Seafoods, Inc., the plaintiff, a seasonal worker, alleges a putative class action complaint against the defendant employer, a seafood processor, claiming various violations of the California Labor Code as well as false imprisonment of the putative class members. The plaintiff alleges that the defendant arranged for her and other seasonal workers to travel to Los Angeles, from around Southern California and several states in Mexico, to fill out employment paperwork and to be tested for COVID-19 before flying to Alaska to process salmon during the June through August salmon season. The plaintiff alleges that while in Los Angeles, she and the putative class members were kept in close proximity to one another while they were filling out employment paperwork, in violation of social distancing guidelines mandated by the city of Los Angeles. Further, the plaintiff claims that she and the putative class members were confined to their hotel rooms (around the clock) against their will for several days while awaiting the results of their COVID-19 tests. The complaint alleges that after several individuals tested positive, the putative class members were confined against their will for another 11 days. 

The plaintiff alleges that, despite being an employee of the defendant, she was not paid any wages during this time, that she was only given two meals per day, and that she was prevented from leaving her hotel room for the duration. Based upon these allegations, the plaintiff claims that the defendant not only violated the California Labor Code by failing to pay her any wages (including overtime wages) during this confinement, but also that she was prevented from obtaining other work as a result of the defendant employer’s tortious conduct of falsely imprisoning her and the putative class. The plaintiff seeks wages for the entire time of confinement, including overtime, as well as damages for emotional distress arising out of the alleged false imprisonment.  

This case demonstrates the paramount importance of planning and quick action by employers during this pandemic. While it certainly remains to be seen whether the plaintiff can prove the allegations of her complaint, high-level decisions made by employers concerning employee wages or hours worked across an employee population during these unprecedented times may well give rise to class or collective-wide allegations. Employers would be well served to take caution, and consult with counsel, before making compensation decisions or other decisions that impact wide swaths of an employee (or prospective employee) population. 

© 2020 BARNES & THORNBURG LLPNational Law Review, Volume X, Number 191

TRENDING LEGAL ANALYSIS


About this Author

Peter J. Wozniak Barnes Thornburg Chicago  Labor Employment
Partner

Pete Wozniak is a vigorous advocate who strives to help his clients navigate issues that can be fraught with challenges as painlessly and efficiently as possible. He is a candid and personable counselor, offering his clients direct advice by leveraging his deep experience performing a broad range of outcome critical functions for complex labor and employment matters.

Pete represents clients across a number of industries, including transportation and logistics, restaurants, retail, manufacturing, and temporary staffing. Handling a number of high profile matters, he identifies the...

312-214-2113
Mark Wallin, Attorney, BT, Chicago, Labor Employment
Of Counsel

In order to provide the best counsel, Mark Wallin believes it is his role to understand his clients’ business needs so he can help them determine what resolution will provide the most benefit. His keen ability to understand his clients’ practical concerns allows him to advise on the best path to successfully resolve issues – whether through traditional litigation or negotiated resolution.

In the course of his practice, Mark has focused on providing the highest-level of service to his clients and building long-term relationships. Specifically, he defends employers in a wide range of employment matters including wage and hour class and collective actions, as well as complex, multi-plaintiff and single plaintiff employment discrimination claims brought not only by private plaintiffs but also initiated by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).

Mark has successfully represented companies of virtually all sizes, litigating matters across multiple areas of the law, from the pleading stage through appeal. He has also represented clients in arbitrations and before administrative bodies.

Mark vigilantly stays abreast of cases, laws, and trends that may impact his clients coming out of the courts, Congress and the state legislature, as well as the U.S. Department of Labor, the EEOC, and state regulatory agencies. He strives to keep a watchful eye on how labor and employment related laws are evolving so as to proactively advise clients.

In addition to his regular legal practice, Mark has undertaken several pro bono cases including trying criminal jury trials in state and federal court, and representing indigent plaintiffs in civil rights matters as part of the federal Trial Bar.

Mark began honing his litigation skill during law school when he interned at the U.S. Attorney’s office for the Northern District of Illinois, where he handled both civil and criminal issues. He also interned for a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, which gave him a unique vantage of seeing the issues from the court’s perspective.

312-214-4591