Au Pairs Reach $65.5M Settlement Over Claims of Collusion to Reduce Wages
Counsel representing au pairs have reached a $65.5 million class action settlement with 15 companies over claims that the organizations mislead the foreign domestic workers about U.S. wage regulations in an effort to pay them below minimum wage.
January 09, 2019 at 06:49 PM
3 minute read
Counsel representing au pairs have reached a $65.5 million class action settlement with 15 companies over claims that the organizations mislead the foreign domestic workers about U.S. wage regulations in an effort to pay them below minimum wage.
Boies Schiller Flexner, which represented the au pairs, and the not-for-profit Towards Justice, announced the settlement Wednesday. The case had been set for a trial in early February in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado, but the parties agreed to settle the case following mediation efforts by U.S. Magistrate Judge Michael Hegarty.
“We're pleased that our years of hard work will bring justice to so many young children workers and fundamentally change the way the au pair industry operates,” Boies Schiller attorney Peter Skinner said.
The settlement is subject to court approval.
According to a press release, the defendant companies, including Cultural Care, AuPairCare International and the American Institute for Foreign Study, were authorized by the U.S. State Department to sponsor individuals to participate in the au pair program and receive the needed visa to work in the states. However, plaintiffs alleged that the companies colluded to pay au pairs less than minimum wage and to mislead the workers about whether they were entitled to receive higher wages under state and federal law.
The release said the visas were intended to create a cultural exchange between countries through several initiatives, including au pairs, but, instead of promoting these goals, the au pair program allegedly worked as a source of below-minimum-wage childcare.
The release said that, along with the settlement, the sponsors agreed to reforms, including a requirement that all future au pairs be adequately paid and informed of their rights under U.S. laws.
The case raised fraud, antitrust and fair wage claims.
“This settlement, the hard-fought victory of our clients who fought for years on behalf of about 100,000 fellow au pairs, will be perhaps the largest settlement ever on behalf of minimum wage workers,” David Seligman, director of Towards Justice, said.
The case had been filed in 2014, and, according to Skinner, over the course of the litigation, plaintiffs counsel uncovered numerous statements indicating that the au pairs had been told they were only entitled to a below-minimum wage stipend that had been set by the U.S. government.
“A lot came to this country thinking this is a set stipend, and I don't have a right to ask for something different,” Skinner said. “There was also powerful evidence of collusion between the sponsors.”
However, in the end, he said, coupled with the amounts the plaintiffs could reasonably expect to receive from a successful trial, the risks that come with bringing a case before a jury and the reforms the defendants were willing to agree to, the parties felt settlement was the best option.
Joan A. Lukey, of Choate, Hall & Stewart in Boston, represented Cultural Care International; Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani Denver-based attorney Thomas Quinn represented AuPairCare; and New York-based Stephen Macri of Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart represented the American Institute for Foreign Study. Neither of the three could immediately return a call seeking comment late Wednesday.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'The Court Will Take Action': Judge Upbraids Combative Rudy Giuliani During Outburst at Hearing
Trump’s DOE Pick Could Spell Trouble for Title IX Enforcement, Higher Ed Funding
4 minute readConsumer Cleared to Proceed With Claims Against CVS 'Non-Drowsy' Medication, Judge Says
4 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250