A Consumer Protection and Employment Law Firm Serving California, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Illinois.

Los Angeles Clothing Company Fined For Labor Violations

Table Of Contents
Summarize with
ChatGPT Claude Gemini Perplexity Grok
Julie Su, California Labor Commissioner issued citations against O & K Apparel Inc., a Los Angeles based wholesale woman’s clothing company, to pay $113,785 in overtime wages for 110 employees, plus penalties of $61,450 for failing to pay proper overtime and $307,250 for issuing improper itemized deduction statements. “Employers must pay workers the wages they have earned,” said Christine Baker, Director of the Department of Industrial Relations (DIR). The Labor Commissioner’s office is a division within DIR. “And the Labor Commissioner’s office will protect their rights, as well as the rights of honest businesses and taxpayers.” According to the DIR, O & K Apparel Inc. makes women’s garments and pays its employees by the piece. Under California Employment law, garment contractors are required to provide accurate itemized statements to employees showing total hours worked and if employees are paid by the piece, they must show the number of pieces produced for specific manufacturers and the rate of pay for each piece in addition to the total hours worked. Labor Commissioner Julie A. Su stated, “There is no place for sweatshop conditions in our 21st century economy. Piece rate payment cannot be used as an end-run around the basic requirement that all workers in California receive a just day’s pay for a hard day’s work, including overtime pay for overtime hours worked. In addition, California law requires itemized wage statements so employees know how much they worked and what they earned. In this case, the pay stubs did not include any of that information, which makes it hard for workers to know when their wages are being stolen right out from under them.” According to the DIR,  overtime is based on the regular rate of pay, which is the compensation employees normally earn for the work they perform. The regular rate of pay may NOT be less than the minimum wage, which in California is currently $8.00 per hour. If an employee is paid by the piece, either of the following methods are acceptable methods for determining the regular rate of pay for purposes of computing overtime:
    • The piece rate is used as the regular rate and you are paid 1 1/2 this rate for production during the first 4 overtime hours in a day, and double time for all hours worked beyond 12 in a day.
   

or

  • Divide the total earnings for the week, including earnings during overtime hours, by the total hours worked during the week, including the overtime hours. For each overtime hour worked the employee  is entitled to an additional 1/2 the regular rate for hours requiring time, and to the full rate for hours requiring double time.
If your employer owes you overtime, please give California Employment Attorney, Todd M. Friedman a call at 877-449-8898 for a free consultation.

Quick Navigation

Free Consultation

Undisclosed
Settlement

TCPA class action against the Los Angeles Times. Final approval granted 2014.

More Details
$750,000
Settlement

Common fund class-wide TCPA settlement against home healthcare provider. Final approval granted.

More Details
$27.6M
Settlement

TCPA class action certified on behalf of approximately 2,000,000 class members under Rule 23(b)(2) and (b)(3). Subsequently settled on a Rule 23(b)(2) and (b)(3) basis. Final approval granted.

More Details
$5.2M
Settlement

/

Unruh Act class action on behalf of approximately 240,000 consumers challenging Tinder’s age-based differential pricing for its subscription service. Final approval granted; subsequently went up on appeal.

More Details
$390,000
Settlement

TCPA class action alleging HD Supply sent unauthorized marketing text messages to consumers’ mobile phones without consent between October 21, 2011 and July 26, 2017. Presided over by Judge Fernando M. Olguin. Case terminated January 29, 2018.

More Details
$1,500,000
Settlement

/

TCPA class action against a Kansas-based payday lender alleged to have contacted consumers via prerecorded calls on their cell phones to collect alleged debts without consent. California federal judge granted final approval.

More Details
$6,500,000
Settlement

/

Cal. Penal Code § 632.7 class action certified by contested motion under Rule 23(b)(2) and (b)(3) on behalf of over 40,000 class members whose calls were recorded without their knowledge or consent. Final approval granted.

More Details
$13,000,000
Settlement

/

$13 Million Class action alleging HSBC recorded consumer telephone calls without knowledge or consent in violation of California’s Privacy Statute (Penal Code § 632.7). California Federal Judge granted final approval.

More Details
$34,000,000
Settlement

/

One of the largest TCPA class action settlements in U.S. history at time of approval. Alleged Chase used an automatic telephone dialing system to contact consumers on their cell phones without prior express consent from July 2008 through December 2013. Settlement class included over 32 million members. Final approval granted March 2016.

More Details
$150,000,000
Settlement

/

Class action on behalf of over 100,000 owners of GM vehicles equipped with allegedly defective LG-manufactured batteries posing fire and safety risks. Litigation commenced December 2020. U.S. District Judge Terrence G. Berg indicated preliminary approval of the $150 million settlement.

More Details
$100,000,000
Settlement

/ /

Landmark gig-economy class action. DoorDash drivers in California and Massachusetts alleged they were wrongly classified as independent contractors rather than employees. Firm served as class counsel. Final approval granted January 13, 2022 — the largest gig-economy worker class settlement in U.S. history at the time.

More Details

Office Locations

Copyright 2025 Law Offices of Todd M. Friedman, P.C. All Rights Reserved.