Lawsuit Against Domino's for Failing to Reimburse Drivers

[Wizzle_Wassell]

Re: Lawsuit Against Domino’s for Failing to Reimburse Driver
gregster:

Wizzle Wassell:

‘Just because car problems happen outside work, does not mean that you are not partially liable for the cost of them when that vehicle is used for business’

ummm- yes I can - so if my driver has an at fault accident outside or work he can ammortise this costs and I am responsible?? NOPE, not true. I am responsible for the BUSINESS USE element of car costs. SOME items can be ammortised NOT ALL.

By your logic, If a driver has a NOT at fault accident while at work, and the car is totaled, then you ARE responsible for the total cost?

gregster you can’t even do logic now can you? No I CAN’t be RESPONSIBLE because my business can’t be held RESPONSIBLE for an accident caused by a third party. You really DON’T know your stuff do you?

I do, however, carry full legal expense insurance which WOULD provide full legal assistance for my driver to a) get a hire car and b) recover the full costs from the other party so to that extent whilst I am not responsible I do provide full assistance to my employee’s at no cost to them.

You really ought to read up on this stuff so you know what your talking about!

 

[Wizzle_Wassell]

Re: Lawsuit Against Domino’s for Failing to Reimburse Driver
gregster:

The DOL says it’s the law, not me. I am just repeating the information as it seems it is difficult for some to understand.

As many other posters have pointed out they also say many other things are ‘the law’ (your words) but you choose to ignore the bits which don’t support your argument. You’ve even said it yourself that they do not agree with you when you call, so it clearly can’t be such a simple issue as you portray (badly at that).

 

[baughman]

Re: Lawsuit Against Domino’s for Failing to Reimburse Driver

Has he been on here longer then the begining of this year yelling about the 55c a mile rate? Does it not show in his one post that before jan 1st of this year. That it was 28c a mile?
I was never paid a base pay when I drove that was below minimum wage. Usually they started drivers at minimum. So all that needed to be covered was the( at that time) .28c a mile. I never ever came close to going under that number. I am not counting tips in that either.
Now after jan 1st of this year. I could see how it could be harder to get the milage rate. I mean the dang thing dbls. I have only worked at one place that paid a per mile rate. Drivers took major advantage of it, by driving all over the place when on the clock to rack up milage. The place paid .30c a mile tho so that was .2c over the rate that was needed.( that was back in 97-99 tho)
It would seem now the average high volume store like I drove at would have to give at least 1.25 a run just to cover the millage rate. Which was about what I got at my last del job anyways. I can see why most places now have $2+ in del fee. You have to jsut to break even on it being a delivery.
Gregster I would be totally on your side if you took it to court and proved you are right, and got an owner to pay u. But all you are doing is coming here and posting the same thing over and over agian. Instead of taking action. taking action isnt posting here. Its going after who did you wrong. Edit: I saw in the other thread you are waiting for your other lawsuit about labor relations to go through first, then you will sue over this.

 

[system]

Re: Lawsuit Against Domino’s for Failing to Reimburse Driver

http://www.irs.gov/taxpros/article/0,id=156624,00.html

Past Standard Mileage Rates

Applicable Period Rates (in cents per mile)
July 1 - December 31, 2008
Business 58.5

January 1 - June 30, 2008
Business 50.5

2007
Business 48.5

2006
Business 44.5

September 1 - Dec 31, 2005
Business 48.5

August 25 - 31, 2005
Business 40.5

January 1 - August 24, 2005
Business 40.5

2004
Business 37.5

2003
Business 36.0

2002
Business 36.5

 

[Charles]

Re: Lawsuit Against Domino’s for Failing to Reimburse Driver
Cal. Dept. of Industrial Relations:

In DLSE Interpretive Bulletin No. 84-7, the Labor Commissioner determined that “nder Labor Code section 2802, an employer who requires an employee to furnish his/her own car or truck to be used in the course of employment would be obligated to reimburse the employee for the costs necessarily incurred by the employee in using the car or truck in the course of employment. The rate of reimbursement can be that agreed to by the employer and employee, or, if there is no such agreement, any reasonable amount.â€

 

[system]

Re: Lawsuit Against Domino’s for Failing to Reimburse Driver

I was not aware that California law trumped US Federal law. Who knew? :roll:

 

[Charles]

Re: Lawsuit Against Domino’s for Failing to Reimburse Driver
gregster:

I was not aware that California law trumped US Federal law. Who knew? :roll:

Whenever I see you post :roll: it lets me know you do not have an intelligent response.

As I said before, California labor laws (heck, all their laws) tend to be more stringent than federal laws. The problem is you have NEVER posted a federal law that mandates the IRS rate. That is because one DOES NOT EXIST.

 

[dman66]

Re: Lawsuit Against Domino’s for Failing to Reimburse Driver

Charles:

Cal. Dept. of Industrial Relations:

In DLSE Interpretive Bulletin No. 84-7, the Labor Commissioner determined that “nder Labor Code section 2802, an employer who requires an employee to furnish his/her own car or truck to be used in the course of employment would be obligated to reimburse the employee for the costs necessarily incurred by the employee in using the car or truck in the course of employment. The rate of reimbursement can be that agreed to by the employer and employee, or, if there is no such agreement, any reasonable amount.â€

Hmmmmm…The DLSE must have their head’s in a hole then…I contacted them awhile back & a few of their dumba$$es told me the IRS rate was a mandate in Cali…As I wasn’t getting any mileage reimburs pay…That has changed since I accomplished to get my boss to tack on a .99 cent delivery charge & give it to the drivers…

Something grego doesn’t have, negociation, reasoning skills…Because of my negociation skills I was able to accomplish to get some mileage pay…Granted, its no money out of my employer’s pocket, still though I accomplsihed this with minimal, good natured negociations…

Tell me…All this flawed legal effort grego has put in…What has he accomplished?..

Grego…I thought it was the law in Cali to pay drivers the IRS rate ?..

 

[system]

Re: Lawsuit Against Domino’s for Failing to Reimburse Driver

Charles:

gregster:

I was not aware that California law trumped US Federal law. Who knew? :roll:

Whenever I see you post :roll: it lets me know you do not have an intelligent response.

As I said before, California labor laws (heck, all their laws) tend to be more stringent than federal laws. The problem is you have NEVER posted a federal law that mandates the IRS rate. That is because one DOES NOT EXIST.

Nor have I ever claimed too! That is where your lack of intelligent responses come into play. :roll:

Here is what the DOL says and you continue to fail to understand:

From page 31 of the DOL Field Operations Handbook (FOH) chapter 30

http://www.dol.gov/esa/whd/FOH/FOH_Ch30.pdf

Car expenses - employee’s use personal car on employer’s business.

In some cases it is necessary to determine the costs involved when employees use their cars on their employer’s business in order to determine MW compliance. For example, car expenses are frequently an issue for delivery drivers employed by pizza or other carry-out type restaurants.
(a) As an enforcement policy, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) standard business mileage rate found in IRS Publication 917, “Business Use of a Car” may be used (in lieu of actual costs and associated recordkeeping) to determine or evaluate the employer’s wage payment practices for FLSA purposes. The IRS standard business mileage rate (currently 28 cents per mile)(EDIT: Now it is 55 cents per mile as of Jan 1 2009) represents depreciation, maintenance and repairs, gasoline (including taxes), oil, insurance, and vehicle registration fees. In situations where the IRS rate changes during the investigation period, the applicable rates should be applied on a pro-rata basis.
(b) The IRS standard business mileage rate may be used in lieu of actual costs for FLSA purposes whether or not the employee will be able to take a deduction on his or her tax return for the business use of the employee‘s car.

 

[Wizzle_Wassell]

Re: Lawsuit Against Domino’s for Failing to Reimburse Driver
gregster:

Here is what the DOL says and you continue to fail to understand:

you can post, and post, and post the same link Gregster. Charles still disagrees with you. He is NOT an owner, does NOT employ any drivers and believes that his local state law allows him (if he did employ drivers) to AGREE a rate with them.

You can continue to post the same link again, and again, and again, and again, and again (as you already have done) but the simple fact is that certain people believe (rightly or wrongly) in different things to you. YOU ARE NOT A LAW MAKER so what are you going to do about it??? NOTHING just post the same link again and again, and again, and again, and again, and again. If that is the sum total of your efforts then I think you should really give up.

 

[system]

Re: Lawsuit Against Domino’s for Failing to Reimburse Driver

The opinions of those who disagree with it are duly noted.

While you may disagree with the law, it is the current policy posted at the DOL’s website. I have posted the qualified legal opinions of others that support it, and I have yet to see any case law that contradicts it.

If you are aware of a case or law that contradicts or supersedes these laws, please share it.

 

[Charles]

Re: Lawsuit Against Domino’s for Failing to Reimburse Driver

http://thepizzacrafters.com/gregster.jpg

 

[system]

Re: Lawsuit Against Domino’s for Failing to Reimburse Driver

Nichols Kaster, PLLP Brings Lawsuit Against Domino’s Pizza for Failing to Reimburse Drivers for Travel Expenses

MINNEAPOLIS, MN, Mar 06, 2009 (MARKET WIRE via COMTEX) On March 4, 2009, two former employees of Domino’s Pizza, LLC filed a class action lawsuit in the Federal District Court for the District of Minnesota. The lawsuit alleges that Domino’s violated state and federal law by failing to reimburse employees for expenses they incurred while delivering pizzas. Under Minnesota law, employers have to reimburse employees for their travel expenses. According to the lawsuit, Domino’s failed to adequately reimburse its drivers, instead paying a ‘per delivery’ amount which was not sufficient to cover drivers’ actual costs.
The lawsuit also involves minimum wage claims. Under both Minnesota law and the federal Fair Labor Standards Act, all employees are entitled to be paid the minimum wage “free and clear” of obligations to their employer. The lawsuit alleges that by requiring pizza delivery drivers to pay for their own automobile expenses, Domino’s also failed to pay their drivers the minimum wage.

Plaintiff’s attorney E. Michelle Drake explained, “The lawsuit alleges that Domino’s required employees to subsidize their business by paying for their own automobile and gas expenses. Minnesota law forbids employers from requiring employees to pay these kinds of expenses. What makes this situation even more egregious is that many Domino’s drivers were only supposed to be paid the minimum wage in the first place. In reality, Domino’s drivers were paid even less than the minimum wage because they had to pay travel expenses out of their own pockets.” Drake continued, “One of the reasons the law exists is to prevent companies like Domino’s from using employees’ money to subsidize their cost of doing business. We hope to recover the money that rightfully belongs to the employees.”

Plaintiffs are represented by E. Michelle Drake and Paul J. Lukas from the law firm of Nichols Kaster, PLLP. Nichols Kaster has offices in Minneapolis, Minnesota and San Francisco, California.

Individuals may find information about joining this action at www.nka.com or by calling (612) 256-3200.

Contact:
Michelle Drake
(612) 256-3249

SOURCE: Nichols Kaster, PLLP

 

[paul7979]

Re: Lawsuit Against Domino’s for Failing to Reimburse Driver
gregster:

Nichols Kaster, PLLP Brings Lawsuit Against Domino’s Pizza for Failing to Reimburse Drivers for Travel Expenses

MINNEAPOLIS, MN, Mar 06, 2009 (MARKET WIRE via COMTEX) On March 4, 2009, two former employees of Domino’s Pizza, LLC filed a class action lawsuit in the Federal District Court for the District of Minnesota. The lawsuit alleges that Domino’s violated state and federal law by failing to reimburse employees for expenses they incurred while delivering pizzas. Under Minnesota law, employers have to reimburse employees for their travel expenses. According to the lawsuit, Domino’s failed to adequately reimburse its drivers, instead paying a ‘per delivery’ amount which was not sufficient to cover drivers’ actual costs.
The lawsuit also involves minimum wage claims. Under both Minnesota law and the federal Fair Labor Standards Act, all employees are entitled to be paid the minimum wage “free and clear” of obligations to their employer. The lawsuit alleges that by requiring pizza delivery drivers to pay for their own automobile expenses, Domino’s also failed to pay their drivers the minimum wage.

Plaintiff’s attorney E. Michelle Drake explained, “The lawsuit alleges that Domino’s required employees to subsidize their business by paying for their own automobile and gas expenses. Minnesota law forbids employers from requiring employees to pay these kinds of expenses. What makes this situation even more egregious is that many Domino’s drivers were only supposed to be paid the minimum wage in the first place. In reality, Domino’s drivers were paid even less than the minimum wage because they had to pay travel expenses out of their own pockets.” Drake continued, “One of the reasons the law exists is to prevent companies like Domino’s from using employees’ money to subsidize their cost of doing business. We hope to recover the money that rightfully belongs to the employees.”

Plaintiffs are represented by E. Michelle Drake and Paul J. Lukas from the law firm of Nichols Kaster, PLLP. Nichols Kaster has offices in Minneapolis, Minnesota and San Francisco, California.

Individuals may find information about joining this action at www.nka.com or by calling (612) 256-3200.

Contact:
Michelle Drake
(612) 256-3249

SOURCE: Nichols Kaster, PLLP

WOW Gregster, You successfully managed to cut and paste the same link that you started this thread with back on March 7th, but this time you highlighted some different parts. Good job, and let me be the first to give you a pat on the back. You are really getting the hang of this cutting and pasting aren’t you.

 

[system]

Re: Lawsuit Against Domino’s for Failing to Reimburse Driver

http://www.overtimecases.com/Cases\DominosPizza.asp x?CaseRef=117

Matt Luiken and Jon Sandquist v. Domino’s Pizza, LLC and Domino’s Pizza, Inc.
In March 2009 we filed a Complaint on behalf of Domino’s pizza delivery drivers against Domino’s Pizza, LLC and Domino’s Pizza, Inc. These pizza delivery drivers seek compensation for all travel expenses (gas, insurance, repairs) they incurred in delivering Domino’s Pizzas. The lawsuit also alleges that Domino’s violated Minnesota law by failing to give delivery drivers the full value of the “delivery charge†paid by customers. The case includes minimum wage claims under both the Minnesota Fair Labor Standards Act and the Federal Fair Labor Standards Act. Plaintiffs contend that by failing to reimburse them for their travel expenses, Domino’s functionally failed to pay the delivery drivers the minimum wage.

The following staff from Nichols Kaster, PLLP are handling this case:

Staff
Dana Landis

Attorneys
E. Michelle Drake
Paul J. Lukas

How do I get involved?
To be eligible for this lawsuit:

You must have worked as a Domino’s pizza delivery driver for any Domino’s corporate store (not a franchise) office at any time after March 4, 2006.
To get involved in the lawsuit, you must complete a Consent Form and return it to us immediately for filing with the Court. If you do not return this Consent Form, we cannot include you in the lawsuit.

Do I have to pay anything?

You do not have to pay anything to our firm if you join the lawsuit. We are handling this case on a contingency basis. This means we will only be paid if the lawsuit is successful in obtaining relief either through a settlement or a final judgment, and that payment will only come out of that settlement or final judgment.

Statute of limitations
There is a statute of limitations in this case that only allows you to recover for damages incurred during employment in the last 2 years. If we can prove the company willfully violated the law, the statute of limitations may be extended to 3 years.

Therefore, it is important that you return your Consent Form immediately to avoid losing any part of your claims pay because of the statute of limitations.

What about retaliation?
Retaliation is against the law. If you currently work for Domino’s and you feel you are the victim of retaliation for being in this lawsuit, contact us immediately. The law protects you from retaliation for asserting your rights and, if you suffer retaliation, you may be able to assert additional claims against Domino’s.

Which locations are included?

Past and present pizza delivery drivers from every corporate Domino’s location nationwide may be included in this lawsuit. If you are not sure whether you worked at a corporate location or not, please contact our office for assistance.

How can I help with the lawsuit?
If you have information that may assist us with this case, please contact us at the following address:

Nichols Kaster, PLLP
Attn: Dana Landis
4600 IDS Center
80 South 8th Street
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
Toll Free Telephone: 877-448-0492, ext. 228
Telephone: 612-256-3228
Facsimile: 612-215-6870
Email: [email protected]

We are looking for the following information:

Names of current or former pizza delivery drivers. This will help us notify potentially eligible employees of this lawsuit. We are not seeking confidential records regarding other employees, like documents marked “confidential” or documents containing social security numbers;
Any documents or records relating to your claim that you were not fully reimbursed for travel expenses incurred during your employment with Domino’s; and
Anything that leads you to believe that Domino’s knew their reimbursement rate was insufficient.
You do not need to have any of the above-requested information to be eligible for this lawsuit.

paul7979:

Good chance that it’ll melt.

It’s gone NATIONAL! This snow ball just got MUCH bigger!

 

[thepizza]

Re: Lawsuit Against Domino’s for Failing to Reimburse Driver

Right or wrong, agree or disagree if this case succeeds and if it sets a precedent, the result will be bad for the drivers.

For example - if the local pizzeria charges a $1.50 delivery charge and pays their drivers $1.00 per delivery, and the average delivery is 4 miles. The average delivery costs about $4 when all costs are factored it. The delivery charge helps to offset that, reducing the cost down to $2.50. Now if this pizzeria does 10,000 deliveries per year, the cost to the bottom line to deliver all those pizzas is $25,000.

If the pizzeria must pay the drivers .585 per mile ($2.34), then the drivers must be given an extra $1.34 per delivery, which adds an additional $13,400 to operating costs - which no good businessperson would just absorb.

So the operator has three options,

1. Increase the delivery fee by $1.34 to $2.84. I can see this working for a good indie who has a quality product , but raising prices for a low quality chain would be a bad move in a slow economy. End result will be less tips for drivers, less deliveries for drivers and less jobs for drivers.
2. Get company cars and give the drivers nothing for mileage (and maybe cut them all down to tip wage). Full compliance with the law, full control over what goes on in your cars, and low labor costs. Operator also keeps 100% of the delivery charge. But may not feasible for super busy delivery shops who have 10-12 drivers on a Friday night
3. Fire all the drivers and stop delivering. I could see many small mom and pop shops choose this route, especially if delivery makes up a small part of their business.

So again whether this is right or wrong, I really think it will end poorly for drivers across the industry.

 

[Registered_Guest]

Re: Lawsuit Against Domino’s for Failing to Reimburse Driver
gregster:

It’s gone NATIONAL! This snow ball just got MUCH bigger!

:lol:

You know why? Because they needed more than 6 people to join the action.

They might get 10 now.

 

[dman66]

Re: Lawsuit Against Domino’s for Failing to Reimburse Driver

Grego strikes again!!.. …

As much as I have no affiliation with any big3…The only big 3 shop that I think makes a decent pie is PJ…I’d love to see all the plantiffs in this lawsuit win…If anything, solely for a payback for making a crappy pizza & trying to stuff throats through gimmick advertising, which DP is very good at doing…

If the plantiffs win…As much as I don’t believe any monetary gain would be of substantial nature here, they’ll surely find a loophole in the law to avoid a standard of having to pay .55 a mile…I’m sure since the “actual expenses” thesis is involved, along side the job being classified a “tip job”…Since DP has barrels of cash, this wouldn’t be hard to accomplish, avoiding paying their drivers the IRS rate & do it legally that is…

The bigger question for me here is, of course it won’t be answered for whatever reason…

Why do you big3 drivers like gregster, continue to subsidize the Big3 business of paying subwages & mediocre mileage pay through your continued employment??..

 

[system]

Re: Lawsuit Against Domino’s for Failing to Reimburse Driver

thepizza:

Right or wrong, agree or disagree if this case succeeds and if it sets a precedent, the result will be bad for the drivers.

For example - if the local pizzeria charges a $1.50 delivery charge and pays their drivers $1.00 per delivery, and the average delivery is 4 miles. The average delivery costs about $4 when all costs are factored it. The delivery charge helps to offset that, reducing the cost down to $2.50. Now if this pizzeria does 10,000 deliveries per year, the cost to the bottom line to deliver all those pizzas is $25,000.

If the pizzeria must pay the drivers .585 per mile ($2.34), then the drivers must be given an extra $1.34 per delivery, which adds an additional $13,400 to operating costs - which no good businessperson would just absorb.

So the operator has three options,

1. Increase the delivery fee by $1.34 to $2.84. I can see this working for a good indie who has a quality product , but raising prices for a low quality chain would be a bad move in a slow economy. End result will be less tips for drivers, less deliveries for drivers and less jobs for drivers.
2. Get company cars and give the drivers nothing for mileage (and maybe cut them all down to tip wage). Full compliance with the law, full control over what goes on in your cars, and low labor costs. Operator also keeps 100% of the delivery charge. But may not feasible for super busy delivery shops who have 10-12 drivers on a Friday night
3. Fire all the drivers and stop delivering. I could see many small mom and pop shops choose this route, especially if delivery makes up a small part of their business.

So again whether this is right or wrong, I really think it will end poorly for drivers across the industry.

Hmmmm. Where have I heard this argument before…

Employers will often use tactics to dissuade employees from joining a union. Many times, they are delivered to employees in a “captive audience meeting”. This is a “mandatory attendance” meeting the employer uses to explain all the terrible things that “will” result if the company unionizes. Threats of shop closure, job loss, wage and benefit reductions, corruption of union officials, etc. are all common stories.

 

[thepizza]

Re: Lawsuit Against Domino’s for Failing to Reimburse Driver
gregster:

Hmmmm. Where have I heard this argument before…

Employers will often use tactics to dissuade employees from joining a union. Many times, they are delivered to employees in a “captive audience meeting”. This is a “mandatory attendance” meeting the employer uses to explain all the terrible things that “will” result if the company unionizes. Threats of shop closure, job loss, wage and benefit reductions, corruption of union officials, etc. are all common stories.

Hmmm… “Terrible things that “will” result if the company unionizes”… Did anyone tell this to the American auto industry?..