Baez et al v. Cayuga Home for Children; Case Number:1:20-cv-02912-MKV

New Action filed in the Southern District of New York

Baez & Santana v. Cayuga Home for Children
Docket No.: 20-cv-2912

On April 8, 2020, Plaintiffs Baez and Santana filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court Southern District of New York against CAYUGA HOME FOR CHILDREN. (“Defendant”), and in that lawsuit alleged upon knowledge as to themselves and their own actions, and upon information and belief as to all other matters, as follows:

Plaintiffs Baez and Santana worked for the Defendant – – an Auburn, New York, not-for-profit corporation operating in Manhattan that works to place foster children into foster homes – – as home finders from January 17, 2017 and October 11, 2016, respectively, through the present.  During their respective employment periods excluding 2018 (“Relevant Time Period”), Defendants intentionally misclassified Plaintiffs as exempt, and as a result, willfully failed to pay them all of their earned wages under the New York Labor Law (“NYLL”) or the overtime wages lawfully due to them under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) and the NYLL. Despite that the Plaintiffs performed primarily non-exempt job duties throughout the Relevant Time Period, the Defendant, in addition to the Plaintiffs thirty-seven and one-half scheduled hours from Monday through Friday from 9:00 am until 5:00 pm with a thirty-minute uninterrupted break each day, routinely required Plaintiffs to work in excess of forty hours each workweek by requiring them to work two-to-three Saturdays each month from 9:00 am until 4:00 pm without an uninterrupted break and on-call shifts once or twice per month. The Plaintiffs regularly worked forty-four and one-half hours in a week. In exchange, the Plaintiffs were paid a flat weekly salary intended to cover only their thirty-seven and one-half scheduled weekday hours and thus intentionally failed to compensate them at any rate of pay, let alone at their straight time rates for all hours up to forty in a week.  Additionally, Defendant violated the NYLL by failing to provide Plaintiffs with accurate wage statements on each payday or with any wage notice at the time of their respective hires.

If any individual is or has previously been an employee of the Defendants named in the lawsuit and/or has information that may be relevant to this case, please contact Borrelli & Associates, P.L.L.C. as soon as possible through one of our websites, www.employmentlawyernewyork.com or www.516abogado.com, or any of our phone numbers: (516) 248–5550, (516) ABOGADO, or (212) 679–5000.

Published by
Borrelli & Associates

Recent Posts

Are Workplace Dress Codes Legal in New York?

In New York, many employers still enforce dress codes, even in today’s more casual work…

1 day ago

Understanding the Rights of Gig Economy Workers Under New York Employment Law

The gig economy has changed the way many people in New York earn a living.…

4 weeks ago

Are Workplace Confidentiality Agreements Enforceable in New York?

Confidentiality agreements have become a standard part of many workplaces. Employers often use them to…

1 month ago

What Are the Legal Requirements for Employee Drug Testing in New York?

Employee drug testing can be a complicated issue in New York. If you're an employer…

2 months ago

Judge grants Conditional Certification of Collective Action in the United States District Court Eastern District of New York

Romero v. Frame Auto Collision Inc. and Jesus Pagan, individually, Docket No.: 24-cv-1998 (JMA)(ARL) Plaintiff,…

2 months ago

How Are Whistleblowers Protected Under New York Law?

Speaking up about wrongdoing at work takes courage. Whistleblowers often face backlash for exposing illegal…

2 months ago