New York City security group accused of overtime pay failure
A large amount of security workers throughout New York City are turning their attention to their employer, Harvard Protection Services, claiming that it has failed to issue overtime pay. The company, which hires out security personnel and fire safety directors, faces a class-action lawsuit from employees seeking to recoup payments owed.
The lawsuit is being directed by Vito Gambino, a four-year employee of Harvard, and supported by the law firm Valli Kane & Vagnini. The case has also found early support from the legal system as a federal judge has stated there is evidence supporting the claim.
According to the filing, Harvard is charged with altering employee hours beyond the 40-hour work week to two-thirds its value. That change allowed a loophole through which Harvard still made the time-and-a-half payments but did not surpass the normal hourly rate. As a result, the court mandated employees who may be subject to greater earnings be altered to the case.
Additionally, Harvard faces allegations that it did not pay employees who traveled to different parts of the city while on the clock, despite company rules saying such travel was a job requirement and not considered commuting.
The lawsuit is being directed by Vito Gambino, a four-year employee of Harvard, and supported by the law firm Valli Kane & Vagnini. The case has also found early support from the legal system as a federal judge has stated there is evidence supporting the claim.
According to the filing, Harvard is charged with altering employee hours beyond the 40-hour work week to two-thirds its value. That change allowed a loophole through which Harvard still made the time-and-a-half payments but did not surpass the normal hourly rate. As a result, the court mandated employees who may be subject to greater earnings be altered to the case.
Additionally, Harvard faces allegations that it did not pay employees who traveled to different parts of the city while on the clock, despite company rules saying such travel was a job requirement and not considered commuting.
All data and information provided on this news blog is for informational purposes only. Infinisource makes no representations as to accuracy, completeness, suitability, or validity of any information on this site and will not be liable for any errors, omissions, or delays in this information or any losses, injuries, or damages arising from its display or use. All information is provided on an as-is basis. Information regarding employment suits and other legal action is not updated after publication, and may not be current.