Commercial Laundry Companies Sued Over Allegedly Egregious FLSA Abuses

New to ClassAction.org? Read our Newswire Disclaimer

Three plaintiffs have put their names on a proposed collective action against Housekeeping Services of Hilton Head, LLC, Southern Tides Cleaning LLC and the companies’ CEO over alleged wage and hour abuses of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). Filed on behalf of current and former laundry workers, the lawsuit alleges the plaintiffs and similarly situated employees were not paid proper time-and-a-half overtime wages when working between 45 to 52 hours per week and were not given bona fide meal breaks of at least 30 minutes. The defendants, who are in the commercial laundry and janitorial business and process millions of pounds of linen for resorts, hotels and restaurants, also allegedly did not compensate workers for restroom breaks, which were only granted with a supervisor’s permission.

In addition to the above-mentioned allegations, the lawsuit further claims the proposed collective members were not compensated for the inadequate meal breaks they were provided, nor for short five- to 20-minute rest periods. The plaintiffs say workers were forced to clock out for these periods of time.

The case then touches on the proposed collective members’ alleged working conditions, and what reportedly happened when the employees tried voicing their concerns to supervisors:

“[The plaintiffs] discussed with each other and their co-workers their concerns about NOT being paid overtime compensation; the extreme heat in the warehouse; and the difficulty they had taking rest room breaks. The employees agreed that [one named plaintiff] was best suited to bring these concerns to their supervisors on everyone’s behalf. Because [the plaintiffs] and similarly situated laundry workers speak Spanish and very little English, the workers hired a Spanish interpreter to assist them with explaining their concerns. When [one named plaintiff’ and the Spanish interpreter attempted to raise these issues the supervisor terminated [the plaintiff] and ordered the Spanish interpreter off the property under threat of arrest.”