Quantcast

Flexport Accused by Former Employee of Violating California Labor Laws

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA RECORD

Sunday, May 18, 2025

Flexport Accused by Former Employee of Violating California Labor Laws

State Court
Webp aqt08m39mppmaga371be5jk602lb

Superior Court of California - Santa Clara County | Official Website

In a significant legal development, a class-action lawsuit has been filed against a major logistics company for alleged violations of California labor laws. The complaint, filed by Kevin Maltie on May 5, 2025, in the Superior Court of California for the County of Santa Clara, accuses Flexport, Inc., a Delaware-based corporation, of multiple labor law infractions affecting its non-exempt employees in California.

Kevin Maltie, representing himself and other similarly situated individuals, alleges that Flexport failed to pay overtime and minimum wages, neglected to provide required meal and rest periods, and committed several other labor code violations. According to the complaint, Maltie worked for Flexport from October 2024 to January 2025 in a warehouse role that involved meeting specific productivity quotas. The plaintiff claims these quotas led to adverse employment actions when unmet and were part of broader systemic issues at Flexport. "Defendants engaged in practices that deprived employees of their rightful wages," states the complaint.

The lawsuit outlines numerous accusations against Flexport: failure to pay overtime wages as per Labor Code sections 510 and 1194; not providing timely meal breaks as mandated by section 512; inadequate rest periods under applicable Wage Orders; and inaccurate wage statements violating section 226. Additionally, it highlights the company's alleged failure to indemnify employees for necessary expenditures like laundering uniforms or using personal phones for work purposes.

Maltie seeks comprehensive relief from the court, including unpaid wages with interest, statutory penalties for waiting time violations under section 203, compensation for missed meal and rest periods as per section 226.7, reimbursement for business expenses under section 2802, damages for quota law violations under sections 2100 et seq., and attorney fees. The complaint emphasizes the need for an injunction against Flexport's unlawful practices and restitution under Business and Professions Code sections 17200 through 17208.

Representing Maltie is Jason W. Rothman from Bibiyan Law Group P.C., while the case awaits assignment to a judge within Santa Clara's Superior Court system under Case No. 25CV465199.

More News