Class Action Alleging Labor Law Violations Filed Against Manhattan Bar

New to ClassAction.org? Read our Newswire Disclaimer

A proposed class action has been filed against 488 Hospitality Group LLC, 790 Lounge LLC, and two individual owners – who collectively own and operate Manhattan rooftop bar The Attic – citing potential federal and state labor law violations. The lawsuit alleges that the defendants improperly paid the plaintiff, a former barback employee, a “tipped” minimum wage rate despite assigning him duties of a non-tipped employee. According to the case, the plaintiff was required to perform non-tipped side work for more than 20 percent of each shift, precluding the defendants from applying a tip credit to his wages.

“The side work that Defendants require of Tipped Employees is not specific to particular customers, tables, or sections, but it is performed in mass quantities for the entire shift or for future shifts. Furthermore, Defendants required Tipped Employees to perform most of their side work before the restaurant opened or after the restaurant closed and no customers were present,” the lawsuit reads.

The case argues that the defendants evaded paying the plaintiff the full minimum wage by improperly classifying him as a tipped employee. The plaintiff also claims that the defendants failed to pay him time-and-a-half overtime wages and spread-of-hours pay required by New York law.

The case further alleges that one defendant, an individual owner, assaulted the plaintiff prior to his discharge.

“At approximately 2:00 a.m., after yelling obscenities at Plaintiff, [the defendant] violently pushed Plaintiff in his left shoulder, causing him physical injury. [The defendant] then attempted to attack Plaintiff further but was held back by a security guard. After protesting this assault and battery, [the defendant] terminated Plaintiff’s employment.”

Notably, the lawsuit mentions that the same defendant has been previously sued over similar claims of workplace assault against other tipped employees. The case calls for the plaintiff to be compensated for the allegedly unlawful payroll practices, as well as the alleged assault.