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.
Tio Leo Management Group LLC is facing a class action unpaid wages lawsuit alleging the company regularly denied employees meal breaks and would not compensate them.
This class action unpaid wages lawsuit was filed by a man from California, alleging he and other employees were not provided proper meal breaks and rest periods despite being forced to regularly work long hours.
Plaintiff Constancio H. filed this unpaid wages lawsuit after exhausting all administrative options, stating the company willfully and knowingly violated California labor laws. Tio Leo Management Group owns and operates several Mexican restaurants in San Diego County, and employs a number of people in various hospitality positions.
According to the class action unpaid wages lawsuit, Constancio worked as a busboy from October 2017 to March 2018 and alleges he was denied 30 minute meal breaks on a regular basis.
Constancio alleges he and other employees regularly worked over five hours without break, with the unpaid wages lawsuit alleging that denying meal breaks was common practice for the company.
Furthermore, Constancio alleges Tio Leo Management Group did not have sufficient written policies that stated their minimum wage employees should be receiving regular meal breaks and rest periods.
In addition to the meal break violations, Constancio alleges he and other employees were denied overtime rates and were not properly compensated for all hours worked. The class action unpaid wages lawsuit also alleges Tio Leo Management failed to provide accurate wage statements that reflected the employees’ wages.
Overview of California Labor Laws
Each of these allegations mentioned in the class action unpaid wages lawsuit are alleged violations of California labor laws that cover non-exempt employees. These employees are typically paid on an hourly basis and do not have any managerial responsibilities or have authority over other employees.
According to California labor laws, non-exempt employees must be paid one and a half times their regular hourly rate after they work over 40 hours in a week or eight hours in a single workday.
In addition, employees must be provided a 30 minute meal breaks every five hours and a 10 minute rest period every four hours. During the meal break, employees must not perform any occupational duties and must be free to leave the company premises.
Employees who are forced to work through their meal breaks and rest periods must be compensated an extra hour of pay in their paycheck. In addition, companies are required to keep accurate pay records of their employees dating back several years to ensure compensation is paid.
The class action unpaid wages lawsuit alleges Tio Leo Management violated California labor laws in the following ways:
- Failure to provide meal breaks
- Failure to authorize and permit rest periods
- Failure to pay minimum wage rates
- Failure to pay overtime wages
- Failure to provide accurate itemized wage statements
Constancio and other employees are seeking compensation for all violations of California labor laws, along with other relevant damages. California employees who believe they are owed compensation for unpaid wages may be able to file legal action against their employer.
This Unpaid Wages Lawsuit is Case No. 37-2018-00061890-CU-OE-CTL, in the Superior Court of the State of California County of San Diego.
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.