Harlem’s Red Rooster Accused of Discrimination, Wage Violations

New to ClassAction.org? Read our Newswire Disclaimer

A former bartender at Harlem restaurant Red Rooster claims in a proposed class and collective action that he was underpaid and discriminated against based on his race. Filed against the eatery’s operating company and an individual owner, the suit alleges the defendants had a “plain aversion to black male bartenders,” noting the plaintiff was reportedly the only black male bartender at a restaurant located in “a largely African-American community.”

The man says he was paid pursuant to a tip credit, which allegedly knocked his pay below the federal and state minimum wage while working as a barback in 2015, and kept his wages below the minimum when he became a bartender in 2016. According to the complaint, the defendants failed to provide tipped employees with any notice that a tip credit would be applied to their wages, which should have prohibited the restaurant from paying the workers below the minimum wage.

The case further claims that the defendants deducted half an hour of pay from each of the plaintiff’s shifts for meal breaks that he was “hardly ever afforded.” The man claims he's owed at least his regular pay rate for these hours, plus the extra half-time rate for the weeks in which he worked more than 40 hours and accrued overtime. According to the case, the plaintiff was paid for some of his overtime hours “sporadically throughout his employment,” but didn’t receive proper time-and-a-half pay for all the hours he worked over 40 each week.

The complaint then describes an early-March 2018 incident when the plaintiff reportedly requested a two-month leave under the Family Medical Leave Act to care for his mother, who was suffering from leukemia. Though his leave was approved, according to the suit, the man was terminated “by surprise” for a “blatantly false and pretextual” reason only two days later.

“Given the timing of Plaintiff’s termination, his status as the only male black bartender, and the patent absurdity of the stated reason for his termination, it is clear that Plaintiff was terminated on the basis of his race and his protected request to care for his sick mother,” the lawsuit reads.