Categories
Antiwork

Local business pays worker 5$ for 40 hours of work and state labor dept will not enforce wage laws due to “arbitration agreement”

I filed wage claim in Texas for minimum wage noncompliance, illegal paycheck deductions, and wage theft. State wage and hour dismissed my claim for “it is preceded by a valid arbitration agreement”. The arbitration agreements are the norm in onboarding paperwork. If you don’t sign you’re not hired, I’m very surprised my state is allowing corporations to be shielded from accountability for legit labor crimes by these agreements. The federal DOL will not allow those agreements to apply to illegal conduct but Texas does. Here’s an extra layer of absurd. Up to that point I was working full time and had also been receiving partial layoff UI benefits for a few months based on earnings reduced through no fault of my own. (Production based payplan) unemployment benefits for the aforementioned week was denied because “you worked full time” because I hit exactly 40 hours rather than 39 or less. Therefore…


I filed wage claim in Texas for minimum wage noncompliance, illegal paycheck deductions, and wage theft. State wage and hour dismissed my claim for “it is preceded by a valid arbitration agreement”.

The arbitration agreements are the norm in onboarding paperwork. If you don’t sign you’re not hired, I’m very surprised my state is allowing corporations to be shielded from accountability for legit labor crimes by these agreements. The federal DOL will not allow those agreements to apply to illegal conduct but Texas does.

Here’s an extra layer of absurd. Up to that point I was working full time and had also been receiving partial layoff UI benefits for a few months based on earnings reduced through no fault of my own. (Production based payplan) unemployment benefits for the aforementioned week was denied because “you worked full time” because I hit exactly 40 hours rather than 39 or less. Therefore I was “unavailable” for other work. Never mind the fact My employer threatened misconduct termination for “you are required to work the duration of your scheduled shift”, which would have meant I had to pay back all UI benefits received and would be disqualified. Appealed the decision citing the federal law stating if a worker is only available to work for the employer that laid them off, they are still to be considered “available for other work” and qualify for benefits. Appeal was denied!!

This was a Fortune 500 company.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *