Aramark, Sweetgreen Face Biometric Data Class Action Lawsuits

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.

Sweetgreen Inc. and Aramark Sports and Entertainment Services LLC have been hit with separate class action lawsuits challenging their policies of requiring workers to use their fingerprints as part of a biometric system to track their work hours.

Plaintiff Joseph Cintron claims that Sweetgreen and Aramark collected and stored workers’ fingerprints without their permission in violation of the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act. He says he was required to clock in and out of work shifts by scanning his fingerprint.

Cintron asserts that Aramark and Sweetgreen “violated [his] privacy by capturing or collecting his biometric identifiers and information without his consent.”

According to the biometric data class action lawsuit, workers’ fingerprints were disseminated and disclosed to the provider of the time-keeping system.

Cintron claims he was never provided with any written materials about the collection, retention, destruction, use or dissemination of his fingerprints, which allegedly constitutes a violation of the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act.

Aramark and Sweetgreen were allegedly required under BIPA to create a written policy that is available to the public and which states the retention schedule and destruction guidelines for the possession of workers’ biometric identifiers and information, Cintron says in the BIPA class action lawsuit.

The biometric data class action lawsuits claim that the employers benefit from workers using their fingerprints to clock in and out of work because it ensures that employees cannot clock in for each other. On the other hand, Cintron says the fingerprinting system puts workers at risk because their biometric data cannot be changed if they are compromised by a data breach, putting the workers at risk of identity theft.

Cintron seeks to represent a Class of current and former hourly paid employees of Aramark who were required to clock in and out of work with their fingerprints using Aramark’s biometric time-keeping system.

He also seeks to represent a Class of current and former hourly paid employees of Sweetgreen who worked at Illinois Sweetgreen locations and were required to clock in and out of work by scanning their fingerprints.

“Plaintiff and the Class are similarly situated to one another because they were all subject to the same allegedly illegal practice: being required to clock in and out of their shifts with their fingerprints despite Defendants failing to adhere to the requirements of the Biometric Information Privacy Act,” Cintron alleges in the Aramark and Sweetgreen class action lawsuits.

The Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act was passed in 2008 to regulate the collection, use, safeguarding and destruction of biometric information. BIPA prohibits private entities from collecting biometric identifiers without first obtaining the individual’s written consent or employment-related release to authorize the entity to collect the biometric information.

Cintron is seeking liquidated monetary damages, injunctive relief, attorneys’ fees and costs.

Cintron is represented by Douglas M. Werman and Maureen A. Salas of Werman Salas PC.

The Sweetgreen Biometric Data Class Action Lawsuit is Joseph Cintron v. Sweetgreen Inc., Case No. 2017CH14820, in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois.

The Aramark Biometric Data Class Action Lawsuit is Joseph Cintron v. Aramark Sports and Entertainment Services LLC, et al., Case No. 2017CH14821, in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois.