Three former Target Corp. employees and one current worker have filed a lawsuit seeking an award of civil penalties, alleging violations of the state Labor Code for failing to pay employees for all hours worked and not compensating them for employment-related expenditures.
Plaintiff Pedro Murillo lives in Los Angeles County and was a Target employee from November 2016 to November 2022. Plaintiffs Isaac Garcia, Pancho D. Jimenez and Hunter Fields all reside in Northern California and of the four plaintiffs, only Fields still works for Target.
The Los Angeles Superior Court suit was brought Monday under the state’s Private Attorneys General Act, which authorizes allegedly aggrieved employees to file lawsuits to recover civil penalties on behalf of themselves, other employees and the state of for purported Labor Code violations.
The plaintiffs are seeking civil penalties only and not general and/or special damages, restitution or other damages.
A Target representative did not immediately reply to a request for comment.
“Because of the economic position of the average worker and his or her family, it is essential to the public welfare that employers obey the wage-and-hour laws so that employees are promptly paid the minimum/overtime wages that the Legislature has required for employees,” the suit states.
So fundamental are California’s wage-and-hour laws that the Legislature has criminalized certain types of violations, according to the suit.
According to the suit, Target failed to pay the plaintiffs and other “aggrieved employees” for all hours worked, including minimum, straight time and overtime wages. The workers also were required to work without pay beyond their normal employment hours, the suit further alleges.
“Some of this unpaid work should have been paid at the overtime rate,” the suit states. “In failing to pay for all hours worked, (Target) also failed to maintain accurate records of the hours plaintiffs and the `aggrieved employees’ worked.”
Target also neglected to maintain accurate records for all meal periods taken or missed by affected employees and did not always pay final wages owed within 72 hours of termination as required by law, the suit states.
In addition, the workers were required in many cases to pay out-of-pocket for necessary employment-related expenses, including office supplies, work attire, use of personal vehicle and cellphone expenses, according to the suit.