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.
A federal judge in California has recently granted preliminary approval for a settlement in a class action Bank of America wage and hour lawsuit.
The settlement was approved in the amount of $6.6 million to resolve claims brought by employees of the financial institution who claimed the bank violated wage and hour laws.
A total of 478 Bank of America employees were represented in the plaintiff Class. These particular employees were responsible for handling online banking, account set up and wiring funds for corporate clients.
The proposed settlement will grant each eligible class member who worked as a “client fulfillment specialist” a minimum of $10,000.
The Class of employees alleged that the bank violated rest break and overtime laws, provided improper wage statements and failed to make timely payment claims.
In addition to the main Class, several subclasses were also included. The subclasses include Class Members from various states, and the settlement will provide differing benefits to workers based on the states in which they worked.
In particular, in states like California and Illinois which have broader labor protections, subclass members will likely receive greater compensation than those from states like North Carolina where labor protections are more narrowly defined.
Bank of America Wage and Hour Lawsuit Avoids Risks of Trial
In reviewing the settlement, U.S. District Judge Richard Seeborg commented that the Bank of America wage and hour lawsuit was worth an estimated $18 million. He posed a question to plaintiffs asking them why they believed the settlement reflected the best outcome for the class.
In response, class counsel stated that no prior examples of case law were able to be found regarding the type of employees represented here. Plaintiffs’ attorneys also stated that the lack of prior case law made it more difficult to estimate the potential outcome if the case went to trial.
Plaintiffs noted that a trial for the Bank of America wage and hour lawsuit would have been hard-fought, and the Class Members may not have ended up winning all that they asked for.
They also stated that the bank would likely argue that the workers could qualify for an administrative exemption to wage and hour laws due to their focus on business clients – an argument that, if presented at the trial, may have not worked in the employees’ favor.
Attorneys for the plaintiffs expressed confidence that the plaintiffs could overcome that argument. But at the same time, admitted the lack of precedent made predicting an outcome unfeasible.
Named plaintiff Allen Buckingham will receive an additional award of $15,000 for the settlement on top of the class claim award – an amount that Judge Seeborg referred to as “pretty substantial.” But the judge also noted that the settlement would not have existed without Buckingham’s work.
Despite approving the settlement amount, Judge Seaborg did ask for a change. He requested an additional provision that would require extra effort to contact Class Members who didn’t cash their checks. The judge noted that “it’s enough money on a per class member basis that those checks shouldn’t end up in the trash.”
The Bank of America Wage and Hour Lawsuit is Allen Buckingham et al. v. Bank of America Corp. Inc., Case No. 3:15-cv-06344, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.
Join a Free California Wage & Hour Class Action Lawsuit Investigation
If you were forced to work off the clock or without overtime pay within the past 3 years in California, you have rights – and you don’t have to take on the company alone.
ATTORNEY ADVERTISING
Top Class Actions is a Proud Member of the American Bar Association
LEGAL INFORMATION IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE
Top Class Actions Legal Statement
©2008 – 2024 Top Class Actions® LLC
Various Trademarks held by their respective owners
This website is not intended for viewing or usage by European Union citizens.