Clarion Hotel Housekeeper's Overtime Class Action Clears Hurdle
Judge Gene Pratter denied Choice Hotels International's motion to dismiss, determining that the plaintiff showed enough of a connection between the international hotel company and the Pennsylvania-based franchisee that she directly worked for.
April 08, 2019 at 02:54 PM
4 minute read
A federal judge has rejected efforts by the parent company of the Clarion Hotel chain to dismiss a proposed class action that claims the company failed to pay overtime to housekeepers.
U.S. District Judge Gene Pratter of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on April 5 denied Choice Hotels International's motion to dismiss, determining that the plaintiff, Gina DiFlavis, showed enough of a connection between the international hotel company and the Pennsylvania-based franchisee that she directly worked for.
Choice Hotels International had contended that the only connection DiFlavis could point to between it and the franchisee, Rama Construction Co., which owned and operated the Clarion Hotel where DiFlavis worked, was the franchise agreement that said Rama was in charge of all personnel issues. However, Pratter said DiFlavis alleged enough in her complaint to allow the case to proceed through discovery.
“The amended complaint states that Choice Hotels exercised significant control over all aspects of the operation of Clarion Hotels, maintained financial data on the business, performed quality assurance visits to evaluate compliance with the rules and regulations, required all Clarion Hotels' owners and managers to attend training, provided the 'Choice University' training program, and more,” Pratter said.
According to Pratter, DiFlavis worked as a full-time hourly housekeeper at a Clarion Hotel and Conference Center in Essington for three months in 2018. She contended that, although she worked on average between 50 and 55 hours each week, she was only paid for 36 hours each week.
DiFlavis alleged that, each day, Clarion Hotel housekeepers are given a list of 16 or more rooms to service, which can be further supplemented throughout the day. Housekeepers, according to DiFlavis are paid $9 per hour for their first eight hours each day, plus $5 for each room they service beyond the mandated 16 in a given day. However, housekeepers must work until they have serviced all of their assigned rooms each day, DiFlavis contended. She alleged it was this requirement that led housekeepers to work between 10 and 12 hours each day, sometimes through paid meal breaks.
Choice Hotels International, which is a Delaware corporation based in Maryland, owns dozens of hotel and motel brands that consist of roughly 6,400 properties globally, including about 300 Clarion Hotels in the United States.
DiFlavis sued the hotel company alleging violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act, as well as the Pennsylvania Minimum Wage Act on behalf of all Clarion Hotel housekeepers.
Along with its motion to dismiss, the hotel company had also asked Pratter to narrow the alleged class to only housekeepers who work at Clarion Hotels that were also owned and operated by Rama Construction, but Pratter said granting that request would be premature.
“Choice Hotels has not met the high standard to strike Ms. DiFlavis' collective and class action claims,” Pratter said. “It is premature to strike any class or collective allegations at this early stage of the case, particularly given that the parties have not yet conducted discovery on these issues.”
In a footnote, Pratter also noted that DiFlavis alleged that Choice Hotels' former CEO, Steve Joyce, was featured on an episode of the TV show “Undercover Boss,” which, she said, showed Joyce directing “a range of improvements after his undercover experiences.” Ultimately, Pratter declined to factor those allegations into her decision.
“Although interesting, the court declines to consider how probative this fact is for the purposes of this motion,” Pratter said.
Attorneys Joseph Centeno of Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney, who is representing Choice Hotels International; David Cohen of Stephan Zouras, who is representing DiFlavis; and Richard DeFortuna of Paisner Litvin, who is representing Rama, each did not return a call seeking 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 AllImmunity for Mental Health Care and Coverage for CBD: What's on the Pa. High Court's November Calendar
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Trying a Case for Abu Ghraib Detainees Two Decades After Abuse
- 2The Distribution of Dangerous Products Via Online Marketplaces
- 3The Products Liability Case Against Tianeptine: The Deadly ‘Dietary Supplement’ Found at Your Local Store
- 4The Evolving Landscape of Joint and Several Liability in Pa.: A Post-'Spencer' Analysis
- 5A Deep Dive Into the Product-Line Exception in Pennsylvania
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