Safelite Solutions Denies CSR Allegations Involving Overtime Pay in Response to August Complaint
October 15, 2010

Safelite Solutions issued a response this week to a suit filed against it in August by three CSRs who claim that the company failed to compensate them with overtime pay when they worked more than 40 hours per week. In the October 13 response, Safelite details its denial of the allegations made against it in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio by former CSRs Patrick W. Heaps and Richard Ruppert and a current employee, Joshua Pursley.

In the suit, Heaps, Pursley and Ruppert allege that the company has failed to compensate them with overtime pay when they have worked more than 40 hours per week, and that Safelite Solutions requires its CSRs to start their shifts each day by booting up their computer systems, but then omit the time it takes the CSR to boot up the system from its calculation of the hours the CSRs have worked each week. Safelite denies each of the employees' allegations in the suit regarding this claim. The company also denies the CSRs' allegations that it has more than 3,000 CSRs, along with several other claims.

Safelite does confirm the salaries listed by the employees in the response, which is between $10-$12.36 an hour; the highest listed is for Pursley, who has been with the company since April 2008 and currently earns "$12.36 or less per hour."

In the defense section of the response, the company says the complaint "fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted," that some or all of the of the plaintiffs' claims are barred by the applicable statute of limitations, that the plaintiffs are barred "in whole or in part, by the doctrines of waiver, estoppel, laches and/or unclean hands," and that the plaintiffs have failed to mitigate their damages (if any).

"Plaintiffs and any members of the putative class were properly compensated for all hours worked and for any hours worked over 40 in a work week," writes the company.

However, Safelite Solutions does note that those that are "entitled to damages … are entitled to a credit for or set off against amounts overpaid to them in the course of their employment and to a credit for overtime and other premium payments already made to them."

Safelite adds, "Some or all of the disputed time for which Plaintiffs and others with whom they are allegedly similarly situated involve wages purportedly owed for time that is not compensable pursuant to de minims doctrine and applicable rounding regulations."
Likewise, the company claims that the plaintiffs (and others) "are not entitled to compensation for time they purportedly worked without [its] actual or constructive knowledge."

Safelite Solutions is requesting that the case be dismissed. The company is represented by Daniel J. Clark of Vorys Sater, Seymore and Pease LLP in Columbus, Ohio.

Need more info and analysis about the issues?
CLICK HERE to subscribe to AGRR magazine.