Delivery Driver's FLSA, ERISA Case Moves Forward Against Gerhard's
A federal judge has denied appliance retailer Gerhard's request for summary judgment in an employment suit brought by one of its drivers.
January 04, 2019 at 04:49 PM
3 minute read
A federal judge has denied appliance retailer Gerhard's request for summary judgment in an employment suit brought by one of its drivers.
U.S. District Judge Mitchell S. Goldberg of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania declined to toss the plaintiff's Fair Labor Standards Act, Employee Retirement Income Security Act, Pennsylvania Minimum Wage Act, Pennsylvania Wage Payment and Collection Law and common-law breach of contract claims.
Plaintiff Seyoung Ra claimed that Gerhard's made him, as a contractor, pay for gas when using delivery trucks, made him pay into a damages fund to be tapped for use if merchandise was damaged during delivery, and did not pay him for his time delivering scrap metal back to the Gerhard's warehouse—which would then profit by selling the scrap.
According to Goldberg, “Gerhard's deducted $400 per week from plaintiff's pay for delivery truck rental, no matter how many days he worked per week, and deducted $50 per week from his pay for a fund to pay for any alleged damage caused as a consequence of a delivery. Gerhard's used these funds at its sole discretion to reimburse customers for any alleged damage. Following the end of plaintiff's tenure as a lead delivery driver, Gerhard's failed to return the retainer fund balance of $910.00, despite the fact that plaintiff did not cause any damages that would justify Gerhard's retention of that money.”
Additionally, Goldberg noted, “On certain dates during the period March 2017 through June 5, 2017, Gerhard's required plaintiff to perform extra work beyond making local appliance deliveries. The additional work included labor for assembly of grills and special installations for Gerhard's customers; travelling long distances to make deliveries to locations such as Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, and on two occasions, to the New York/Connecticut area; assembling gas grills at customer homes; and performing other labor related to appliances being delivered to Gerhard's customers. On certain occasions when plaintiff was required to perform additional work, he was advised that he would receive additional compensation ranging from $10 to $680 depending on the additional work assigned. The agreement for the additional work compensation was allegedly an oral agreement between plaintiff and Gerhard's.”
But Gerhard's allegedly failed to pay Ra the agreed compensation for the additional work, which totaled approximately $3,500, Goldberg said. Ra also alleged employer-sponsored benefits were unavailable to him, as he was not considered a full-time employee.
Andrew Abramson represents Ra.
“Mr. Ra is looking forward to continuing to pursue his claims in the litigation,” Abramson said in an email.
Benjamin Spang of Dilworth Paxson represents Gerhard's and did not respond to a request for comment.
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'Recover, Reflect, Retool and Retry': Lessons From Women Atop Pa. Legal Community
3 minute readEDPA's New Chief Judge Plans to Advance Efforts to Combat Threats to Judiciary
3 minute readPa. Superior Court's Next Leader Looks Ahead to Looming Challenges in Coming Years
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1The Law Firm Disrupted: Playing the Talent Game to Win
- 2A&O Shearman Adopts 3-Level Lockstep Pay Model Amid Shift to All-Equity Partnership
- 3Preparing Your Law Firm for 2025: Smart Ways to Embrace AI & Other Technologies
- 4BD Settles Thousands of Bard Hernia Mesh Lawsuits
- 5A RICO Surge Is Underway: Here's How the Allstate Push Might Play Out
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