Bay Area Stylists Agree to $1M Settlement to End Salon Wage and Hour Lawsuit

Bay area stylists and five hair salons have agreed to a $1 million settlement, ending a salon wage and hour lawsuit against their employer.

On May 1, California Superior Court Judge Mary Wiss approved the proposed settlement and granted conditional certification to a settlement Class with three subclasses — assistants, stylists, and former employees. Wiss stated that now, the settlement will be sent to Class Members for review.

The settlement deal was reached after attorneys had addressed the judge’s concerns from earlier this year, to her satisfaction.

The salon wage and hour lawsuit settlement was reached during a day of negotiations in November. In addition to payments to Class Members, it allocates $343,333 to attorneys’ fees and costs, $11,250 to Private Attorneys General Act penalties, and $10,000 for CPT Group Inc., the company that administered the settlement. Each of the three class representatives will receive $7,500.

The claim was initially filed in April 2016. In the salon wage and hour lawsuit, 229 licensed stylists employed by five hair salons in the Bay Area, called diPietro Todd Salons, claimed that their employer violated wage and hour laws by failing to pay overtime, not providing breaks for meals and rests, and requiring stylists to recruit models for training sessions without payment.

According to the employees of the salon wage and hour lawsuit, diPietro Todd failed to pay at least minimum wage and idd not pay overtime when appropriate. Additionally, the salon allegedly did not provide wage statements and did not provide breaks for meals and rest as required by law. The employees went on to claim that the company failed to pay all of the wages that the employees were due, and unlawfully deducted funds from employees’ pay.

The employees’ claims are also specific to each subclass, claiming that technicians and assistants also suffered wage and hour violations specific to their role. Both subclasses for current employees cover people who were employed between April 2012 through Tuesday, when the settlement was approved. Former employees whose employment dates back to April 2013 are considered under a subclass.

According to the salon wage and hour lawsuit, assistants were required by the company to participate in weekly training classes. At these classes, they were allegedly required to practice hair cutting, styling, and coloring techniques. The assistants claim that to participate in these mandatory trainings, they had to recruit a model on which they would perform the techniques. Allegedly, they had to recruit the model on their own time and were not paid to do so.

Technicians, who were assistants that then completed training and became stylists and colorists brought forward additional claims. They claim that the company paid them a percentage of the cost paid by each customer, and the company kept the rest.

They claim that though the company called this method of payment a “commission,” this was really a piece-rate wage because their work constituted a service, and they were not selling a product, which is the situation in which commission pay is appropriately used. Allegedly, under this system, they were not given the wages and rest period to which they were entitled.

The diPietro Todd Wage and Hour Lawsuit is Case No. CGC16551342, in the California Superior Court for the County of San Fransisco.

Join a Free Salon Wage and Hour Class Action Lawsuit Investigation

If you worked for Drybar or another salon in the last four years and you were denied compensation for off-the-clock work, overtime, and/or missed meal and rest breaks, you may qualify to join a free salon employee class action lawsuit investigation.

Learn More