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 Jimmy John’s class action suit filed by employees claims the assistant store managers were wrongfully mistreated by the the sandwich restaurant chain.
The Jimmy John’s class action suit formed after numerous similar lawsuits were filed by store managers, with a federal judge left to determine how much responsibility the employees should handle in their occupational duties.
The Jimmy John’s class action suit alleges the company and its franchise locations pay and manage said assistant managers. U.S. District Judge Charles P. Kocoras is presiding over the Jimmy John’s class action suit, and is expected to soon weigh in on his assessment of the situation.
The lawyers involved in the Jimmy John’s class action suit are arguing over whether or not the Champaign, Il.-based Jimmy John’s location should be considered a joint employer with the parent company regarding the employment of the franchisee’s workers under federal labor laws.
Overview of Jimmy John’s Class Action Suit
The litigation began in 2014 when Jimmy John started facing two main class action lawsuits that were filed by assistant managers. These claimants alleged the company should be responsible for determining the employment classification, and that the company had used this leverage to wrongfully classify management employees.
This would make them exempt from minimum wage benefits and other protections awarded under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The plaintiff has alleged their employment classification was improper, as they do not typically have the occupational duties related to management roles such as supervising employees.
At least 90% of their duties would consist of duties not so different from nonexempt employees, such as cleaning and attending to customers. This first Jimmy John’s class action suit was eventually transferred into Illinois federal court in 2015, with lead plaintiff Scott Watson representing the Class.
The second Jimmy John’s class action suit was filed in Illinois federal court by a group of attorneys representing plaintiff Emily Brunner and other “second assistant store managers.” In 2016, these claims were consolidated and putative classes were conditionally certified, even with the objections of the company arguing they were fearing “financial ruin.”
However, with other similar actions also forming, these filings are increasing legal pressure on Jimmy John’s franchise locations throughout the country. These additional filings prompted the federal court to grant Jimmy John’s request for an injunction in March 2017 to block those cases from progress while the Jimmy John’s class action suit is ongoing.
In more recent developments, Jimmy John’s requested the court to declare a rule barring plaintiffs from suing the sandwich restaurant chains regarding the decisions made by specific franchise owners. The restaurant chain argued for this because these specific managers had hired and managed these employees.
In May 2017, Jimmy John’s requested summary judgment and argued it should not be considered a joint employer with its franchisees and should ultimately not be held accountable for the alleged misclassifications.
The plaintiff party argued the company relied on “four old, artificial and formalistic” standards, in order to determine joint employer status and employee classification.
Join a Free Wage & Hour Class Action Lawsuit Investigation
If you were forced to work off the clock or without overtime pay within the past 3 years, 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.