Who else is liable for unpaid wages?

Google and Urpantech settled employee lawsuit over nonpayment of  overtime.

What happens when your employer faces difficulties paying a significant claim for wages?

Information regarding the identity of the various “employers” becomes important when employees have serious claims for unpaid wages or wrongful termination. Sometimes a smaller company may not have the financial resources to compensate employees who suffered damages.

If more than one company is involved in the employment relationship, several legal theories can be pursued to recover payment of wages.  Other companies may be joint employers, depending on the extent of control that one has over the other. They may also constitute a single integrated enterprise with interrelated operations, common management, centralized control of labor relations, and common ownership. One of the companies may be the agent of the other.

Although highly technical, various courses of action can be pursued with the creativity and persistence of the attorney representing the employees. Consider the following case against Google, Inc.

Google worked with staffing agency Urpan Technologies to engage Contract Recruiters to work for Google.  Contract Recruiters worked as part of Google’s recruiting team and performed the hiring and interviewing process that served Google’s staffing needs.

Tymuoi Ha was hired by Urpan Tech to work as a Contract Recruiter for Google. She worked alongside Google’s other permanent Contract Recruiters. However, Urpan Tech’s practice  was  to  cap  the  amount  of  overtime  it  pays to individual Contract Recruiters regardless of the amount of overtime hours actually worked. There was a limit to the overtime hours that Contract Recruiters were allowed to report. Both companies, however, allowed the employees to work additional unpaid overtime hours.

Ha was eventually fired after she complained to her immediate supervisor (a permanent manager at Google) about not being paid overtime.

Ha sued both Urpan Tech and Google in a class action, claiming back wages for unpaid overtime. Even though Urpan Tech was the company that hired and directly paid Ha, and thus, appeared to be Ha’s employer, Ha argued that Google is the real employer and that Urpan Tech was simply an “agent” of Google.

Google directly interviewed Ha and other contract recruiters like her. Urpan Tech would not have hired Ha if Google had not approved it. Recruiters were directly supervised by Google managers and had to follow Google’s policies. Ha alleged that Google set the terms and conditions of day to day work. Google provided the office space and equipment for the recruiters to do their jobs. More importantly, Google created and implemented the policies regarding hours and wages that governed the recruiters’ work. These factors became solid bases for Ha’s argument that Google is also her employer.

Rather than proceed to trial, the parties decided to settle the case. Google and Urpan Tech agreed to pay the nearly 800 class members $5.5 million in damages. The net settlement amounts were to be distributed on a pro rata basis depending on the employee’s length of service at Google.

The Law Offices of C. Joe Sayas, Jr. welcomes inquiries about this topic. All inquiries are confidential and at no-cost. You can contact the office at (818) 291-0088 or visit www.joesayaslaw.com or our Facebook page Joe Sayas Law. [C. Joe Sayas, Jr., Esq. is an experienced trial attorney who has successfully recovered wages and other monetary damages for thousands of employees and consumers. He was named Top Labor & Employment Attorney in California by the Daily Journal, consistently selected as Super Lawyer by the Los Angeles Magazine, and is the recipient of PABA’s Community Champion Award for 2016.]