On March 28, 2011, the California employment law attorneys at Blumenthal, Nordrehaug & Bhowmik filed a class action lawsuit against AT&T alleging that the wireless provider violated California wage & hour laws by mislabeling at-home virtual call center employees as independent contractors in order to avoid paying these employees for all of the hours they work, including overtime hours and minimum wages.

The California employment law attorneys at Blumenthal, Nordrehaug & Bhowmik have filed a class action lawsuit against AT&T in Northern California alleging that the wireless phone giant has violated the rights of at-home virtual call center employees under the California Labor Code. The class action lawsuit against AT&T for Labor Code violations was filed on March 28, 2011 in the Northern District of California, entitled Perry v. AT&T and Arise, Case No. CV111498JCS.

According to the class action complaint filed against AT&T by the labor law attorneys at Blumenthal, Nordrehaug & Bhowmik, the mobile and wireless provider has hired at-home call center employees to provide billing and technical support for AT&T customers. The complaint alleges that AT&T devised an illegal scheme of mislabeling these virtual at-home call center employees as independent contractors in order to avoid workers' compensation costs as well as paying state and/or federal taxes.

The AT&T call center employee class action lawsuit further alleges that the wireless provider intentionally misclassified the at-home virtual call center employees as independent contractors in order to get around wage & hour requirements in violation of California employment laws. Whereas the state’s minimum wage rules, lunch break requirements and overtime laws protect employees, the laws do not apply to independent contractors.

The AT&T overtime class action lawsuit alleges that the wireless provider mislabeled at-home call center employees because these workers are required to perform work subject to AT&T’s control. AT&T has the authority to exercise complete control over the work performed and the manner in which the work is performed by these at-home call center employees. Further, AT&T controls the at-home virtual call center employees’ work schedule and hours, according to the complaint.

For more information, visit the AT&T at-home virtual call center employee class action lawsuit website or call (866) 771-7099.

With its main employment law office located in San Diego County, the California employment law attorneys at Blumenthal, Nordrehaug & Bhowmik have a statewide practice of representing employees on a contingency basis for violations involving wages and hours, overtime pay, discrimination, harassment and wrongful termination.

Xcel Energy Inc. and its Colorado subsidiary were acquitted of criminal charges Tuesday in the deaths of five workers at a hydroelectric plant tunnel in the mountains west of Denver.

After nearly three days of deliberations, a jury in Denver's U.S. District Court acquitted the Minneapolis-based utility and Public Service Co. of Colorado of five counts of violating federal safety regulations, including not having a rescue plan.

The workers were trapped in the Cabin Creek plant tunnel near Georgetown, about 40 miles west of Denver, when a flammable solvent they were using to clean an epoxy paint sprayer ignited Oct. 2, 2007.

The workers communicated via radio for 45 minutes with colleagues and rescue crews. Reaching them would have involved using ropes or ladders to go down a 20-foot vertical section of tunnel, then along a 1,000-foot section at a 55-degree slope, to reach a horizontal section where the workers were. Rescuers tried lowering air tanks to the trapped workers, but the workers were overcome by smoke and fumes.

Killed were Donald Dejaynes, 43, Dupree Holt, 37, James St. Peters, 52, Gary Foster, 48, and Anthony Aguirre, 18, all of California.

Federal prosecutors had argued that Xcel knew about dangerous conditions deep inside the power plant tunnel and violated U.S. safety regulations. Xcel attorney Cliff Stricklin insisted the utility followed the law and that California-based contractor RPI Coating Inc., which employed the workers, was responsible for their safety.

Xcel and Public Service Co. each had been charged with five counts of violating Occupational Safety and Health Administration regulations. If convicted, each company could have faced fines of up to $2.5 million.