Expensive: Million-dollar lawsuit against Apple!

an old Apple employeeclaiming that the company pays its employees biweekly instead of weekly applefiled a class action lawsuit against Allegedly, the job of Apple store employees requires manual labor. Therefore, the company weekly payment he has to do. It is also believed that the company has disrupted employment in New York with this payment method.


AnTuTu announced: Here are Apple’s fastest devices!

AnTuTu announced the fastest Apple devices of March. So this month, which device performed how?

Apple violates labor law in New York

For more than seven years, Apple’s Manhattanworking in his shop in Raven Ramos claims that the company did not pay him as required by state law. A class action lawsuit also filed on behalf of other employees, Apple’s state violation of labor law upon it.

https://i0.wp.com/shiftdelete.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/Pahaliya-patladi-Applea-million-dollarlik-dava-1.jpg?resize=1170%2C658&ssl=1

New York State Commissioner of LaborBy law, manual workers are required to be paid weekly, unless there is an authorization from . It is thought that Apple did not receive this authorization for its store employees and paid their wages every two weeks. The lawsuit therefore recommends that people who work at Apple through negligence be covered by the law.

The lawsuit is an approximation of Ramos’ job responsibilities. 25 percentIt leads to the thought of classifying it as manual labor. These duties include working on the sales floor, unboxing products, assisting customers, and emptying cash registers. case, at least 100 members covers.

https://i0.wp.com/shiftdelete.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/Pahaliya-patladi-Applea-million-dollarlik-dava-2.jpg?resize=1170%2C658&ssl=1

In the lawsuit, Apple’s negligence leads to the belief that it is depriving its employees of money they owe. As a result, compensation claims are made on behalf of all employees. If the claim for compensation 5 million dollars allegedly exceeded. On the subject, Apple has not yet made a statement.

So, what do you think about this case? You can share your views with us in the comments section or on the SDN Forum.

source site-30