Jimmy John’s Franchise No-Poach Class Action Settlement Reached

Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.

Jimmy John’s Franchise No-Poach Class Action Lawsuit Overview: 

• Who: Sandwich chain Jimmy John’s has reached a settlement with an employee closing out a four-year-old class action lawsuit.
• What: The lawsuit alleged that the company’s no-poach rule suppressed employees’ wages.
• Where: The claim was filed in Illinois.

Sandwich chain Jimmy John’s has reached a settlement with an ex-worker, closing out a four-year-old class action lawsuit that claimed the franchise’s no-poach rule suppressed employees’ wages.

US District Judge Nancy J. Rosentengel allowed plaintiff Donald Conrad and the company time to finalize their settlement by dropping an order to dismiss the case, Law360 reports. No settlement details were made available.

Two months ago, Rosentengel refused to certify the Class, saying Conrad should have applied for other jobs or tried to represent employees when he was serving as a Jimmy John’s manager.

Jimmy John’s Franchises Conspire To Suppress Wages With No-Poach Rule

The class action was first filed in 2018, alleging that Jimmy John’s franchises orchestrated a conspiracy among its owners to suppress the wages of more than 550,000 employees by agreeing not to hire each other’s workers. 

The restaurant, the claim alleged, violated federal and state antitrust laws by prohibiting its franchisees from hiring each other’s employees. The no-hire, no-solicit contract provision at issue is part of the franchise agreement between Jimmy John’s and its many sandwich restaurant franchisees.

Under terms of the franchise agreement, Jimmy John’s franchisees are prohibited from hiring any current employee of Jimmy John’s or a Jimmy John’s franchisee, or any employee who has worked for Jimmy John’s during the preceding 12 months. Franchisees are likewise prohibited from soliciting such persons to seek employment with them.

The company reached a deal with Washington prosecutors to end the no-poach policy in 2018, Law360 reports.

The no-poach class action lawsuit isn’t the only one Jimmy John’s is facing. In 2020, it was hit with legal action alleging it misrepresented its cookies as “all natural,” when they contain refined flour, niacin, reduced iron, thiamine mononitrate, riboflavin, folic acid, sugar, milk powder, soy lecithin, and baking soda.

Have you worked at a Jimmy John’s franchise? Let us know what you think about the settlement in the comments section!

Conrad is represented by attorneys Derek Brandt, Richard McCune, Michele Vercoski and Joseph Sauder of McCune Wright Arevalo LLP.

The Jimmy John’s Franchise No-Poach Class Action Lawsuit is Butler v. Jimmy John’s Franchise LLC, et al., Case No. 3:18-cv-00133, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• 4.6M Neiman Marcus Online Accounts Exposed in Recently Disclosed 2020 Data Breach
• Do You Qualify: Surgical Staples Complications and Recall Lawsuit Investigation
• Do You Qualify: Firefighting Foam Cancer | PFAS Chemicals Lawsuit Claim Review
• Do You Qualify: Boys & Girls Clubs of America Sexual Abuse Class Action Lawsuit Investigation