The Defendant, a company that provides on-demand merchandising services to third party retailers throughout the country. operates a mobile app through which its Merchandisers can receive schedules and assignments, report their progress, and track their compensation.

The Employees

Position(s): Merchandisers

Location(s): Anywhere in the United States

Time Period: August 6, 2014 – present

The Claims in the Lawsuit

The Lawsuit claims that misclassified merchandisers as independent contractors, and committed violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act, the California Labor Code, and the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

According to the lawsuit, merchandisers around the country were not paid in accordance with the Fair Labor Standards Act, which sets a minimum wage of $7.25 per hour and requires overtime pay at 1.5 for all hours worked over 40 in a workweek. The lawsuit claims that the only pay merchandisers received was a per-job rate, with no additional or premium compensation for hours worked over 40.

The lawsuit asserts numerous additional wage violations on behalf of merchandisers who worked in California:

Aside from their piece-rate compensation for completion of projects, Merchandisers do not receive any separate compensation for the hours they spend on other compensable activities, including but not limited to driving between projects, and taking short rest periods;

Merchandisers incur work-related expenses including but not limited to gas and mileage expenses for time spent driving between work locations, and purchases of equipment such as folding tables, table cloths, and ice buckets, but receive no reimbursement from for such expenses.

Failure to provide an uninterrupted, thirty-minute meal period to Merchandisers who work more than five hours, or a second thirty-minute meal period to Merchandisers who work more than ten hours in a day.

Failure to make available a ten-minute rest period to Merchandisers who work more than 3.5 hours, or a second ten-minute break after six hours;

Failure to pay earned wages within 30 days;

Failure to provide suitable seats;

Finally, the lawsuit alleges that all merchandisers nationwide had their background checks procured by without providing written consent, in violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

Case Status

08/06/2018: the case was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, and has been assigned to Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu

02/19/2019: The court issued an order staying the case pending the completion of an individual arbitration proceeding (Merchandisers)