California Class Action Labor Lawsuit Filed Against Marriott Subsidiary

Los Angeles, CAA California labor lawsuit against a subsidiary of hotelier Marriott has been put forward as a class action by a former sales executive who claims she was not properly compensated for hourly work. Stacy McComack also asserts that consent forms associated with background checks included a liability waiver that is alleged to be in violation of regulatory authority.

The defendant in the proposed California labor law class action is Marriott Ownership Resorts Inc., a division of Marriott that specializes in the development and vending of time-shares.

The California labor employment law class action asserts commission sales executives and associates were unable to take meal breaks and rest periods, and were not compensated for them. McComack, who is identified as the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit, states in Court documents that an overly busy work day often did not allow sales executives the freedom, or opportunity to pause for meal breaks and rest periods as mandated by California labor laws.

To that end, according to Law360 (08/21/17), California state labor laws hold that meal breaks and rest periods can only be forfeited if the employee is paid for the missed breaks, and / or meal period. The lawsuit asserts that Marriott failed to properly compensate McComack and representative class members for those missed breaks. The resulting missed pay, the lawsuit states, also affects overtime pay and creates a situation where the sales executives were essentially working off the clock.

“Defendant required plaintiff and California class members to work off the clock without paying them for all the time they were under defendant’s control performing post-shift duties, specifically by failing to provide enough labor hours to accomplish all the job tasks that defendant expected plaintiff and California class members to complete,” the complaint alleges. “The plaintiff and other California class members forfeited time worked by working without their time being accurately recorded and without compensation at the applicable rates.”

The California labor lawsuit asserts pay records lack any reference to rest breaks or meal periods.

McComack also alleges that sales reps undertook additional tasks from home, including fielding calls for which the plaintiffs saw no compensation. Plaintiffs further allege Marriott failed to reimburse employees for using their personal mobile phones for work-related purposes.

McComack’s California labor lawsuit is Stacy McComack et al. v. Marriott Ownership Resorts Inc., Case No. 3:17-cv-01663, in the US District Court for the Southern District of California. The lawsuit seeks to represent a class of California sales executives who were paid on commission since August 2013.

McComack also seeks damages for a nationwide class of people who have applied to work for Marriott Ownership Resorts since August 2012 – and this relates to a background check release that included a liability waiver. McComack alleges the release form in question violates guidance under the Federal Trade Commission, together with alleged violations against the Fair Credit Reporting Act (The Act), which states background checks are not to seek information or include terms beyond what are deemed as standard disclosures under The Act. For this, McComack seeks statutory damages of $1,000 per applicant, as well as punitive damages, equitable relief and attorneys’ fees.