Facts

Pamela Ruben-Knudsen and Marnine Casillas were employed by Arthur J. Gallagher and Co., a brokerage service, in exempt client service manager positions. Client service managers are assigned to client accounts by Gallagher, and their position primarily consists of performing clerical tasks and facilitating the flow of information between producers, clients and insurers in connection with insurance renewals and new business. Despite having "manager" in their title, client service managers are not responsible for managing or supervising any employees, and do not customarily have the authority to exercise their discretion or independent judgment. They are primarily provided with routine clerical tasks and must perform those tasks according to specific instructions. Pamela Ruben-Knudsen and Marnine Casillas brought a class action lawsuit against Arthur J. Gallagher and Co. and Arthur J. Gallagher Service Company, LLC, on behalf of the company's client service managers, under the California Labor Code, Wage Order 4-2001 and the Unfair Competition Law.

PLAINTIFFS' CONTENTIONS: Plaintiffs contended that defendants misclassified them as overtime-exempt, despite their managerial title, and asserted that they were asked to perform mainly clerical tasks on overtime, but without the extra pay. Plaintiffs alleged that defendants failed to provide adequate off-duty meal periods or accurate wage statements showing, among others, the gross wages earned and the total hours worked. Plaintiffs also claimed that, by uniformly and unlawfully classifying plaintiffs as a salaried position exempt from overtime pay, defendants improperly reduced their labor costs by placing a larger burden on the plaintiffs without paying overtime compensation. Plaintiffs asserted that defendants have a uniform policy that requires plaintiffs to regularly work more than eight hours per day and/or more than forty hours per week to complete their assigned tasks from defendants, and that defendants were aware that the assigned workload could not be completed in a forty-hour work week. Plaintiffs further alleged that defendants willfully failed to pay plaintiffs whose employment ended all wages due at the time of termination.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS: Defendants denied all contentions.

Result

The case settled for $8,000,000.