Class action lawsuits provide some groups of people, a way to unite in court looking for justice. These lawsuits are sometimes filed by one or multiple people alleging that a company or entity has harmed a large group of people, when a lawsuit becomes a class action, it extends to all “members of the same group” or people who may have similar complaints to those alleged in the lawsuit.
Companies often opt for class actions settlements, providing a payment to the members of the group, who usually waive their right to initiate extra legal actions when receiving the money. These payment agreements include statements from the defendant in which they indicate not to have committed any crime.
Companies typically resort to settlements in class actions to avoid the costs of a major litigation, pollution, discrimination or misleading advertising are some of the issues that can lead to a class action at the doors of a company.
Class Action Lawsuit Against White Castle — $968 Compensation for Eligible Americans
Since we are talking about class action settlements, there is a possibility that you will receive a large payment from a well-known fast food chain, which is already only pending the approval of a judge.
A federal judge confirmed the allegations that White Castle violated Illinois state biometric laws by using fingerprint-monitoring clocks. A federal judge in the state of Illinois gave preliminary approval to a $9.4 million settlement, according to the Illinois General Assembly.
The judge blames White Castle for violating the state’s laws on biometric privacy by using fingerprint monitoring clocks for its employees. The agreement will allow about 9,705 members of the group to receive compensation close to $968 each, regardless of whether or not they remain working at White Castle.
Class Action Payout: White Castle to Compensate Personnel
This ruling takes into account claims that the fast food chain bypassed the Illinois State Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) by failing to get the correct consent from employees before collecting their fingerprint data.
The legal battle has been going on since January 2019, when Latrina Cothron and other plaintiffs filed a class-action lawsuit against White Castle, according to the official report of the Illinois court.
They made the claim that the company had failed to comply with BIPA guidelines despite implementing time control systems that were based on fingerprints since the inception of the law in the year 2008.
Judge John Tharp Jr., who presided over the case, preemptively denied White Castle’s attempts to dismiss the claims. Tharp said that a consent form signed by Cothron in the year 2018 did not constitute a valid liability waiver under the BIPA.
The judge emphasized that the form did not clearly inform Cothron about the waiver of his rights to sue for prior violations.
On the other hand, the court denied White Castle’s argument that the Illinois Workers’ Compensation Act precluded Cothron’s claims, emphasizing that such defenses have consistently failed in similar BIPA cases throughout the district.
Legal Precedents Set by the White Castle Lawsuit
Most of Cothron’s accusations were accepted, a claim related to the biometric data retention and destruction policy was dismissed, Judge Tharp ruled that, as Cothron continues to work at White Castle, the company’s obligation to provide a data destruction policy is not applicable, since his employment ties with the company had not concluded.
The lawsuit highlighted the unique risks associated with biometric data, emphasizing that, unlike traditional forms of identification, this includes identification credentials, biometric markers are permanent and cannot be easily changed if they are compromised.
