A judge has given preliminary approval to a $2.47 million settlement of a lawsuit brought against the Archdiocese of Los Angeles by current and former cemetery workers in a labor dispute alleging they were not fully paid for all hours worked.
The plaintiffs’ Los Angeles Superior Court lawsuit was filed in March 2024 under the state’s Private Attorneys General Act, which allows employees to sue employers for labor law violations while acting as private attorneys general to collect penalties on behalf of the state and other aggrieved employees. The lead plaintiff is cemetery counselor Cecilia Estrada, who worked at a Rowland Heights burial ground.
On Tuesday, Judge Laura A. Seigle gave her nod to the accord, which will affect just over 800 employees and include some deductions from the total gross amount, including about $865,625 in attorneys’ fees and a $10,000 enhancement payment to Estrada. The archdiocese has denied all of the employees’ allegations.
“The court finds preliminary approval of the settlement is fair, adequate and reasonable,” stated a minute order prepared by the judge’s clerk. A motion for final approval will be heard by Seigle on Aug. 6.
According to the suit, the archdiocese “engaged in a pattern and practice of wage abuse against (Estrada) and other hourly-paid and/or non-exempt employees.”
Estrada and the others were required to, among other things, work off-the-clock without overtime or other compensation and they also were not paid for missed meal and rest breaks, the suit alleges. In addition, employees were not promptly paid when they left their jobs, did not receive accurate wage statements and were not reimbursed for some business-related expenses, according to the suit.
Estrada worked for the archdiocese from October 2021 until November 2023. In a sworn declaration in favor of the preliminary settlement approval, she says she took a “sizeable risk” by filing the lawsuit.
“First, I understood that if I lost, I would potentially have to pay the costs in the lawsuit,” Estrada says. “I also understood there was a risk of losing any job and/or income due to the time that I would have to spend fulfilling my responsibilities in this matter, including having to attend the trial, if needed.”