Unpaid Overtime Plaintiff Alleges Misclassification in Class-Action Lawsuit

San Francisco, CAYet another California overtime pay laws class action alleging misclassification of employees as independent contractors has been filed, this time by an employee of a start-up valet parking service. The allegation holds that the defendant, Luxe Valet Inc., controls every singular aspect of the parking process as if attendants were employees. But they are not. In so doing, it is alleged that Valet attendants miss out on overtime pay under California overtime law.

The plaintiff in the case is Jonathan Corrente. He alleges in his overtime pay laws class action that it is inappropriate to classify attendants as independent contractors, in that attendants have no say or autonomy in the parking process. Rather, the opposite is true: Luxe appears to micromanage the entire process, even to the point of providing attendants with a script and directing them as to what to say to the consumer.

Corrente also alleges that Valet parking attendants are instructed as to specific entry and access points for certain parking lots, are told the location within the lot for the vehicle to be parked, and how the car is to be retrieved and thus returned to the owner.

The attendants are directed on the proper methods of inspection of damage and policy for the securing of customers’ keys. It is alleged that the detailed script provided to the attendants in order to guide their interaction with customers also contains a prompt to ensure the attendant informs the consumer that the attendant does indeed work for Luxe.

It is alleged in the overtime pay lawsuit that the entire process is spelled out in minute detail.

California remains host to a string of unpaid overtime lawsuits alleging non-payment of wages and other alleged violations against California labor law. The deliberate misclassification of employees in an attempt to save on labor costs appears to be a favorite ruse: classify the job and the worker as an independent contractor, yet in reality treat the worker as if he or she were an employee. This includes little to no provision for autonomy, or any capacity or allowance to seek other concurrent work, which an independent contractor would ordinarily have the freedom to do, given that they are not an employee of the company per se and therefore not under the employer’s direct control.

In his lawsuit, filed May 22, Corrente states he worked for Luxe from January through February 2015 and was classified as an independent contractor for his entire tenure. The case is Jonathan Corrente v. Luxe Valet Inc., Case No.CGC-15-545961 in the Superior Court, State of California, County of San Francisco.