After at least four employees sued Epicurean and Co. for unpaid overtime wages, the company has agreed to pay two of the workers’ back wages, as well as the requisite damages. Although workers should not have to challenge their employers in court to recoup unpaid wages, this case is a distinct victory for workers trying to secure their earned overtime pay.
This settlement marks a departure from Epicurean’s past intimidation tactics. The company was sued twice in 2010, over the same issue failure to pay the Fair Labor Standard Act approved wages for overtime. These were both dropped after Epicurean threatened the workers’ employment and immigration statuses (Epicurean denies these allegations).
Despite the initial loss, the cases were reopened in July 2012. Three plaintiffs also filed a second case. This time around, a third worker joined the other two plaintiffs, although Epicurean denies that this worker has even worked any overtime.
In the matter of the first two cases, Epicurean has called an “offer of judgment.” This also includes the payment of $5,000 and $8,000 to the respective workers. The FLSA requires that employers repaying lost overtime wages also pay “liquidated damages” equal to the lost wages.
These damages serve to compensate workers for the hardships endured in the lawsuits—potential loss of employment and the possibility of being reported from immigration—as well as the real harm of having to live without those wages for the years the case was pending.
Wage workers are particularly vulnerable to employee intimidation during an economic downturn, when jobs are harder to come by. It is not uncommon for employers to take advantage of workers’ relatively powerless positions, manipulating them into surrendering wages or benefits. And this case is especially striking because the workers’ demands were simple wage complaints. Overtime is federally mandated, but based on worker testimony, the company apparently felt they could escape even their most basic obligations.
Given Epicurean’s behavior and the stress of having to sue for back wages, the workers deserve this extra compensation. Hopefully these damages, although a far cry from hefty punitive damages, will deter Epicurean from intimidating workers in the future.
Epicurean’s admission of guilt is also a small moral victory, though it has no legal bearing on the settlement.
Although in monetary terms this settlement is little more than a slap on Epicurean’s wrist, it is heartening to see workers overcome concerted intimidation schemes to challenge their employer’s flagrant disregard for the law: They took on a legally more powerful party even without the protection of a union. This victory confirms the need for wage safeguards—and the need for even more stringent protections of workers’ rights.
