Employment Archive

Metallica Drummer Accused of Stiffing P.A. Settles Lawsuit

November 17th, 2011. By

Metallica drummer Lars Ulrich recently settled a wage and hour lawsuit that had been filed by a former personal assistant, Steven Wiig. Wiig claimed a whole bunch of labor law violations: years of unpaid overtime (years!) along with alleged state and federal labor violations, breach of oral contract and continuing wages.

Yep, your run-of-the-mill California overtime lawsuit NOT! We’re talking METALLICA!

Now, “Metallica” tends to conjure up headbanging images—think Beavis and Butthead (heh-heh)—and a lot of what some folks would call noise. Case in point, their live “Enter Sandman” video showcases some of those whiplash-inducing moves the band is famous for—and famous they are with that video alone having over 52,000,000 views on youtube. They’re the stuff of (hard) rock legend…off to never-never land! (In fairness, they’ve got some memorable ballads in their repertoire as well—like “Nothing Else Matters” (see video above)).Im with the band tshirt Metallica Drummer Accused of Stiffing P.A. Settles Lawsuit

Ok. So they’re rock stars. And unless much has changed in the last oh, fifty plus years, rock stars tend to be magnets when it comes to wannabes wanting coveted jobs like “personal assistant”. Hell, it’s a twenty year old’s fantasy…screw getting a desk job after 4 years of hitting the books. Hit drop/add with the emphasis on “drop” and hit the road. Yeah, you’re down with the roadies, groupies, parties and perks. The all-access pass to backstage glam and prestige…you’re with the band now, man…(& you can advertise that fact with the t-shirt at right, at zazzle.com).

Oh wait—you expected to be paid on an hourly basis as well? And given a bonus each year? Ahh, but see—as with any situation where supply exceeds demand, prices get driven down. Lots of available labor? Labor gets cheap, right? And maybe that’s when labor starts to get—or at least feel—abused.

Hey, you wanted to be with the band…

So here we are with Lars Ulrich getting sued by his personal assistant. It’s an interesting case—similar to the PR hacks complaining not long ago about their compensation—because clearly this guy, Wiig, put up with the deal for “years” (2001-2009).  A decade. Why hang so long in a gig that you think is screwing you over?

According to the Marin Independent Journal, Wiig acted as Ulrich’s chauffeur, managed his art collection, handled his scheduling and “other tasks and errands” upon request. That translated to around 70 hours a week, which was upped to 80 hours a week when Metallica was on tour.

Wiig claimed he performed those duties for $45,000 a year. He also claims to have had a verbal agreement (red flag!) for annual bonuses. Of course, according to marinij.com, Ulrich’s side claims Wiig received $110,000 a year before bonuses, free rent and a free car. I suppose only the tax man knows for sure (wink-wink).

At any rate, the two sides have settled (terms not disclosed). My guess is that Wiig came out ahead on this one—but what to do now? Oh yeah, write a memoir “Snared: My Life with Lars Ulrich and Metallica”.

Wal-Mart Sex Discrimination Class Action: Slice, Dice and Onward Ho

October 27th, 2011. By

Walmart Cart Wal Mart Sex Discrimination Class Action: Slice, Dice and Onward HoClose to 80% of you who voted in our poll that asked, “Did the Wal-Mart women have a case?” responded in the affirmative. Clearly, you disagreed with the US Supreme Court after it determined that the original class action lacked a cohesive enough group of plaintiffs (i.e., a “class”) with similar circumstances.

Well, as the saying goes, hell hath no fury like a woman scorned—and sure as shootin’ there are still some mighty ticked off former female Wal-Mart employees who aren’t wanting to just let it ride. Their attorneys aren’t backing down either. They’re just moving on to plan B.

Plan B in this case is to slice and dice the original class action lawsuit—which was nationwide–into smaller regional sex discrimination cases. The first case has just been filed in California—so a heads up to the estimated 45,000 or so current and former California Wal-Mart workers: this is one to watch.

The new smaller lawsuits still allege Wal-Mart discriminated against female employees by paying them less than their male counterparts, and by promoting women less often.

Stay tuned.

Ruth’s Chris Steak House Faces Discrimination Class Action

October 18th, 2011. By

Ruths Chris Steak House Ruths Chris Steak House Faces Discrimination Class ActionBeen to a Ruth’s Chris Steak House? Aside from it being a tongue twister (try saying “Ruth’s Chris” fast ten times), once you get inside you’ll notice it looks very…boys’ club.

It’s that solid wood thing going on that’s characteristic of most bigger name steak houses. Like Smith & Wollensky. Or Peter Luger (though Luger’s is missing those white lint-producing tablecloths). Outback, Longhorn’s, Morton’s…same drill. And the handles on those steak knives—if you didn’t know any better you’d think you were handling a Winchester Model 1895.

No, not much feminine going on there. So it seems almost apropos that a sexual discrimination lawsuit would somehow crop up in the midst of all that manliness. And so one has—for Ruth’s Chris Steak House.

A group of current and former female employees has filed a gender discrimination lawsuit against Ruth’s Chris. Their complaint alleges that female employees have been subjected to: lower compensation than their male counterparts; sexist comments; and harsher disciplinary action than that which is doled out to the guys there.

The women are seeking class action status for this one, and if gets certified the class would include all female Ruth’s Chris employees who worked at the restaurants or the company headquarters from September, 2006 to the present.

To quote from the lawsuit (Bush v. Ruth’s Chris Steak House, U.S. District Court, District of Columbia, No. 10-01721): “The work environment at RCSH [Ruth's Chris Steak House] is one that is demeaning to women, reflects a culture of male domination and female subjugation, and is a causative factor in the discrimination against women in compensation, promotion, and termination.”

What’s interesting here is that the “Ruth” in Ruth’s Chris was actually Ruth U. Fertel, who purchased Chris Steak House in New Orleans in 1965 and got the whole thing going. She passed away in 2002. One can only wonder what the successful, entrepreneurial businesswoman who created this businessman’s beefery would think of this…

Hollywood Lawsuit #2: PR Peeps Show up at Events, Don’t get Paid?

October 5th, 2011. By

Rogers and Cowan Hollywood Lawsuit #2: PR Peeps Show up at Events, Dont get Paid?The difference between this Hollywood lawsuit and yesterday’s post is that this one comes from a PR Rep who was actually on payroll.

Seems Daniel Malakhov—who worked for major PR firm Rogers & Cowan—filed a lawsuit against the firm alleging that he and other Rogers & Cowan publicists were required to work PR events after hours (when else are they typically?)—but they did not receive overtime pay, meal breaks or rest breaks. I suppose it has the makings of your basic California overtime lawsuit, if not perhaps that of a script-worthy plot line.

And let’s face it, if you’ve ever attended a PR event of any sort, it’s the PR folks who are hustling around, playing meet & greet, and ensuring all runs smoothly. Heck, even bathroom breaks can be hard to come by. It’s easy to see where overtime pay could be in order.

Apparently, too, the lawsuit claims that Rogers & Cowan didn’t mandate attendance at PR functions, but in making them voluntary made it clear that failure to attend such events would negatively affect their chances of career advancement.

So Malakhov is thinking bigger here—it’s Hollywood, after all. He’s seeking class action status on this one. And, Malakhov, showing a bit of altruism (?), is looking out for his PR brethren and filing the class action on behalf of all the firm’s employees.

The class action seeks the usual suspects: back wages and damages–along with an injunction that would force Rogers & Cowan to change its after-hours work policies.

In terms of the injunction, however, US District Judge George H. Wu ruled last week that Malakhov could not seek the injunction as Malakhov, himself, could no longer benefit from it as he is no longer an employee of the firm. Needless to say, Malakhov’s side is saying that to reject the injunction would mess with the the ability for the lawsuit to help those current employees who are seemingly still at the mercy of Rogers & Cowan’s existing  (alleged) pay practices.

Hollywood Lawsuit #1: Black Swan Interns Name Wrong Defendant?

October 4th, 2011. By

Black Swan Hollywood Lawsuit #1: Black Swan Interns Name Wrong Defendant?It’s a long-standing reality that the words ”glamour and prestige” don’t find themselves in the same sentence with “unpaid intern” in just about any industry. But, when it comes to movie production gigs or landing a plum internship at a fashion mag, they never do.

And there’s a reason for that.

The reason is, you’re there as low-cost help—ok, exceedingly low-cost help—for which in return you get to learn, potentially come within 50 feet of the talent or score some swag—and—and here’s the biggie—you get to pay your dues. Why? Because if you’re going for an unpaid internship you’re most likely trying to rack up resume bullet points (or, nowadays, LinkedIn blurbs) and, btw, you most likely don’t have enough of those bullets and blurbs to actually land a paying gig.

Ahh, but that harsh reality has not stopped Alex Footman and Eric Glatt from filing a labor lawsuit against Black Swan movie production company, Fox Searchlight. Indeed, they’re seeking class action status. And back pay. And an injunction prohibiting Fox Searchlight from improper use of unpaid interns.

It seems both Footman and Glatt were given the opportunity to work as unpaid interns on the flick. But they were treated badly—badly as in having to get coffees and lunches. I don’t know what they expected, beyond what the FLSA outlines as criteria for an internship at a for-profit,  but I’m sort of glad after seeing the movie that no one at the helm offered them an internship manning the camera, making final edits—or doing Natalie Portman’s makeup.

The FLSA internship guidelines include the following six criteria:

It’s probable, or at least highly arguable, that Footman and Glatt got training & experience, got an incredible credit on their resumes, didn’t displace anyone, were supervised, probably got more out of the deal than the production company did, did not have any promise of a job ex post facto and weren’t paid.

Public sentiment (as in comments I’ve been reading across the web on this story) seems to support the notion that perhaps Footman and Glatt have been living in some self-entitlement fairyland in which they’ve interpreted an unpaid internship to equate something akin to an actual new hire program. You know—where the red carpet (no pun) is rolled out for that honeymoon phase of employment…the company’s vision statement handed over in colorful PowerPoint…the new hire welcome luncheon…the mentor program…the benefits enrollment…

I’m usually all for the down-trodden workers—those who are really being ‘used and abused’—like the alleged abuse going on over at that Amazon warehouse. But somehow, this Black Swan intern lawsuit just doesn’t seem to have enough going for it for me. Maybe I feel this way even more so as a result of Fox Searchlight’s official response to the lawsuit—a key excerpt of which is here:

“These interns were not even retained by Fox Searchlight and, in fact, were working for the production company that made Black Swan well before Fox Searchlight even acquired its rights in the film. These individuals were never employed as interns or retained in any capacity by Fox Searchlight, which has a proud history of supporting and fostering productive internships.”

If indeed true, it just makes a mockery out of things here even more—and may make plaintiffs Footman and Glatt black sheep of the film industry (ok, couldn’t resist that one). It sort of helps your cause when you sue the right defendant, right? And, I can only postulate that well, let’s face it, if you want your lawsuit to grab headlines, better to go with a bigger name defendant like Fox Searchlight, right? (ps, Fox Searchlight’s official response also stated that it was an attempt to grab media attention; it was reportedly director Darren Aronofsky’s production company who had initially brought Footman and Glatt on as unpaid interns).

We’ll have to monitor this one, but in the meantime, it’s been announced that Darren Aronofsky is set to direct  the new film, Noah. Word to the unwise (and unpaid) interns who are chomping at the bit to be a part of this one: don’t forget your wellies.

Legal Help Now
Popular Categories
Lawyers Giving BackAsbestos News RoundupPleading IgnoranceTotally Tortelicious
Archive by Category
Tags
Asbestos asbestosis asbestos lawsuit Asbestos Mesothelioma Asbestos Settlement asbestos_mesothelioma Avandia Bank of America BP BP Oil Spill California labor law chinese drywall Class Action Consumer Fraud Discrimination Employment false advertising FDA Glaxo GlaxoSmithKline GSK Lawyers Giving Back medical malpractice mesothelioma Overdraft fees Overtime Pay paxil Pfizer Pleading Ignorance Pro Bono Prozac Reglan Seroquel SSRI SunTrust Tardive Dyskinesia Tortelicious Toyota Veterans Wal-Mart Week Adjourned Yasmin Yaz Zicam Zyprexa
Links
  • Legal Juice
  • Marketing Strategy and the Law
  • MyFoodPoisoningLawyer
  • WSJ Law Blog
  • Share this Page
    RSS Feed
    |
    Free Delivery
    Find us on
    Find us on FacebookFind us on LinkedInFind us on Foursquare Follow us on Twitter
    Polls

    Is President Obama's appointment of Richard Cordray as Consumer Financial Protection Bureau chief legal?

    View Results

    Loading ... Loading ...
    Better Business Bureau

    Best of the Web Approved
    Visit our Zazzle Store