Speedway LLC Convenience Stores
Speedway LLC Convenience Stores
SERVING THE GREATER PHILADELPHIA AREA AND BEYOND
This class and collective lawsuit seeks unpaid overtime wages for Speedway's convenience store "managers" who were paid a salary and denied overtime pay for hours worked over 40 per week. The lawsuit is going forward in the United States District Court in Massachusetts. The lawsuit alleges that Speedway violated the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), the Massachusetts Minimum Fair Wages Act (MMFW), the New York Minimum Wage Act (“NYLL”), the Illinois Minimum Wage Law (“IMWL”), the Pennsylvania Minimum Wage Act (“PMWA”), and the New Jersey Wage and Hour Law (“NJWHL”) by failing to pay extra "overtime" compensation when the managers worked over 40 hours per week. According to the lawsuit, the managers are entitled to overtime pay because, among other reasons, they spend most of their time performing the same type of non-managerial work as the stores' hourly employees. The company denies violating any laws.
More information and case updates are available below:
APR 22, 2019
Today, our firm, along with co-counsel Lichten & Liss-Riordan, P.C., filed a class and collective action lawsuit against Speedway LLC in the United States District Court in Boston, Massachusetts. The lawsuit seeks to recover overtime overtime wages for salaried managers at Speedway's convenience stores. A copy of the Complaint is available below.
JUL 8, 2019
Today the federal judge assigned to this case issued an order denying the company's motion to dismiss the claims brought under the Massachusetts Minimum Fair Wages Act. We are very excited about this decision. The company argued that the convenience store managers fell under the exemption for gas station workers. In denying the company's motion the Court stated:
"In this purported collective action, plaintiff Joseph DaRosa alleges that although he was hired as a salaried general manager at a Speedway convenience store, he largely performed non-managerial tasks and worked an average of 55 hours a week. DaRosa asserts entitlement to overtime pay under the Fair Labor Standards Act (count I) and the Massachusetts Minimum Fair Wages Act (MFWA) (Count II).
Defendant Speedway moves to dismiss count II because the MFWA exempts application to employees employed "in a gasoline station," Mass. Gen. Law ch. 151, §1A, and Speedway is a gas station. Whether DaRosa was employed by a gasoline station is a question of fact whose resolution is premature at the pleading stage. Further, according to the Complaint (whose well-pled allegations the court must accept as true), DaRosa was employed by a convenience store and performed duties such as "assisting customers, running the cash register, stocking shelves, loading/unloading/counting inventory, and cleaning." Compl. para. 10. Accordingly, the partial motion to dismiss will be DENIED."
SEP 3, 2019
Today, we filed a motion for "conditional certification" of this lawsuit. If this motion is granted by the Judge, General Managers will be sent a court-approved notice giving them the opportunity to join (or "opt-in") to this lawsuit. A copy of the motion papers are available below. We hope to have a decision from the Court on this motion in early 2020.
FEB 12, 2020
Today, the federal Judge overseeing the lawsuit issued an order conditionally certifying a collective in this case under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Notice of this lawsuit will now be sent to potentially covered General Managers in the coming weeks. A copy of the Court's order is available below.
JUL 10, 2020
The deadline for individuals to join this lawsuit has now passed. We are very happy that approximately 950 current/former General Managers have joined the lawsuit.
AUG 24, 2020
Today the Court entered granting our request to file an amended complaint adding state law wage and hour claims for GMs in Pennsylvania, New York, New Jersey and Illinois. A copy of the order is below.
SEP 1, 2020
Today the Court entered a revised scheduling order setting forth deadlines in this case including a second round of notice to potential members of the collective under the FLSA. We will now begin the discovery phase which is expected to last until early 2021. A copy of the order is below.
FEB 12, 2021
Today the Court entered an order extending the deadlines for discovery in this case as well as our motion to certify the state law overtime classes of GMs under Rule 23. A copy of the order is below.
MAY 3, 2021
Today we filed our motion to certify the claims of GMs in Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, New York, Illinois and New Jersey as "class actions." If this motion is granted, we would be able to proceed to trial for all GMs in Level 1-5 stores in these states. It is expected that the Court will not rule on this motion until later this year. Speedway also filed a motion to decertify the FLSA collective of approximately 1,100 GMs who previously joined this case from across the country. If Speedway's motion is granted, the lawsuit will only proceed to trial on behalf of the 5 named plaintiffs. We will be filing our opposition to this decertification motion in early June.
JUN 1, 2021
Today we filed our opposition to Speedway's motion to decertify the FLSA collective of approximately 1,100 GMs from across the country who previously joined this case. In doing so, we argued that the claims of all 1,100 GMs can be successfully tried in a single case. It is expected that the Court will not rule on this motion until later this year.
JUN 15, 2021
Today we filed our reply brief in further support of our motion to certify Rule 23 classes of GMs from the states of New York, Illinois, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania and New Jersey. It is expected that the Court will not rule on this motion until later this year.
DEC 6, 2021
If you should have any questions about the status of this case, please call our office at (215) 866-1551.
“Have significant experience in similar matters under the [Pennsylvania Minimum Wage Act]” - Torres v. Brandsafway Indus. LLC, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10631, at *8 (W.D. Pa. Jan. 20, 2023).
“I highly recommend this law firm.” - Brandon
“I highly recommend contacting them to discuss your case.” - Tanya