"*" indicates required fields
The Bajco franchise, which is operated by over a dozen legal entities and individuals, operates Papa John’s stores in Indiana, Illinois, Florida, and elsewhere.
On May 1, 2020, our firm first filed suit against Bajco, in a case called Valesh, et al. v. Bajco International, LLC, et al., No. 4:20-cv-00028.
Since this case was filed, multiple delivery drivers have been required to pursue their claims in arbitration. Our firm currently represents 8 Bajco drivers in individual settlement negotiations or arbitration actions against the company.
If you worked for Bajco and are interested in pursuing unreimbursed expenses, contact us for a free consultation.
This lawsuit and the arbitrations that followed allege that Bajco under-reimburses its delivery drivers for the costs the drivers incur when they use their car for the company’s purposes, i.e., to make deliveries.
Specifically, the drivers claim that the company reimburses at either a per-delivery or per-mile amount that is not enough to cover the drivers’ vehicle expenses. This alleged under-reimbursement results often results in a minimum wage or other wage and hour violation.
Under-reimbursement of Vehicle Expenses
First, the plaintiff alleged that the company does not properly reimburse for vehicle expenses.
The drivers’ position is that they must be reimbursed at the IRS standard business mileage rate (currently $.585 per mile) when the employer does not collect records of the drivers’ actual expenses and reimburse based on those records.
Even if the company is permitted to reimburse based on an “approximation,” as we expect the defendants will argue, the plaintiff alleges that the Bajco Papa John’s stores have failed to “reasonably approximate.”
Violation of the Rules for Claiming a Tip Credit
Second, the plaintiff alleged the company failed to properly claim a “tip credit” against the minimum wage because they failed to actually pay the wage rate they promised to pay, after account for under-reimbursement expenses.
In addition to under-reimbursed expenses, the drivers claim they are entitled to the difference between full minimum wage and the “tipped wage rate” the employer claimed to pay, because the employer failed to meet the requirements for taking a tip credit. For example, if a driver was paid $5.00 per hour on the road in a state where minimum wage was $7.25, they would be entitled to $2.25 for each hour worked ($7.25-$5.00=$2.25) in the plaintiff prevails on this claim.
Plaintiffs filed an unopposed motion for preliminary settlement approval of a class action settlement involving over 8,000 Papa John’s delivery drivers who worked at a Papa John’s store owned by the Bajco Group from July 28, 2019-October 3, 2023.
If the Court enters an order preliminarily approving the settlement, a notice will be sent to all eligible class members who will have an opportunity to submit a claim form to participate in the settlement.
If the settlement is approved each class member will receive payment based on the hours they worked on the road, making deliveries for defendants during the relevant time period. Those who worked for defendants for longer periods of time within the relevant time period will receive a greater share of the settlement.
If the Court grants preliminary approval, it will conduct a Final Fairness Hearing approximately 165 days after the Order preliminarily approving the settlement is entered. At the Final Fairness Hearing, the Court will determine whether the Settlement Agreement should be approved as fair, reasonable, and adequate. If the Court grants final approval of the settlement, plaintiffs should expect to see payments go out within 60 days of the approval.
If you have any questions about the settlement, or if you have any questions about delivery driver rights in general, please call our firm at 512-202-0710.
On July 28, 2022, Biller & Kimble filed suit against “Bajco,” a nationwide Papa John’s pizza franchisee owned by Nadeem Bajwa and Faisal Bajwa.
This is the second lawsuit our firm has brought against these defendants for allegedly underpaying their delivery drivers. Like the first suit, this case alleges that Bajco enacted and enforced reimbursement policies that resulted in their delivery drivers making less than minimum wage for the hours they work after accounting for expenses.
Federal law prohibits employers from paying employees less than minimum wage, either outright or by improperly shifting costs onto employees.
The plaintiffs filed this lawsuit after Bajco refused to engage in arbitration with them. Because Bajco claimed that the plaintiffs signed arbitration agreements (you can learn more about arbitration by clicking here), the plaintiffs filed arbitrations with the American Arbitration Association. But Bajco refused to participate in those arbitrations. As a result, the plaintiffs filed the present suit.
The plaintiffs seek to represent all Bajco delivery drivers nationwide who choose to participate in the case. They also assert class claims on behalf of all Bajco drivers in Illinois and Florida. If you worked for Bajco and are interested in pursuing unreimbursed expenses them, contact us for a free consultation.
The lawsuit asserts the following claims:
Under-reimbursement of Vehicle Expenses
First, plaintiffs allege Bajco does not properly reimburse for vehicle expenses.
The drivers’ position is that they must be reimbursed at the IRS standard business mileage rate (currently $.585 per mile) when the employer does not collect records of the drivers’ actual expenses and reimburse based on those records.
Even if the company is permitted to reimburse based on an “approximation,” as we expect the defendants will argue, the plaintiff alleges that the Bajco Papa John’s stores have failed to “reasonably approximate.”
Plaintiffs allege that Bajco’s compensation and reimbursement policies and practice violate the federal Fair Labor Standards Act, Illinois Minimum Wage Law, the Illinois Wage Payment and Collection Act, and the Florida Constitution.
Violation of the Rules for Claiming a Tip Credit
Second, plaintiffs allege Bajco failed to properly claim a “tip credit” against the minimum wage because they failed to actually pay the wage rate they promised to pay, after account for under-reimbursement expenses.
In addition to under-reimbursed expenses, the drivers claim they are entitled to the difference between full minimum wage and the “tipped wage rate” the employer claimed to pay, because the employer failed to meet the requirements for taking a tip credit.
Unjust Enrichment
In addition, the plaintiffs assert claims for unjust enrichment. Plaintiffs allege that Bajco’s Papa John’s stores unfairly benefit by requiring their minimum wage delivery drivers to cover one of their most costly business expenses without proper reimbursement. The drivers are conferring a benefit on the company, the company is aware of the benefit, and it would be unjust for the company to retain that benefit without commensurate compensation. The drivers allege these circumstances result in a violation of Florida and Illinois common law.
Biller & Kimble filed an individual delivery driver arbitration against Bajco.
Biller & Kimble filed an individual delivery driver arbitration against Bajco.
Biller & Kimble filed an individual delivery driver arbitration against Bajco.
Biller & Kimble filed an individual delivery driver arbitration against Bajco.
Biller & Kimble filed two individual delivery driver arbitrations against Bajco.
Biller & Kimble filed an individual delivery driver arbitration against Bajco.
Biller & Kimble filed an individual delivery driver arbitration against Bajco.
Shortly after the case was filed, the defendants filed a motion arguing that the delivery drivers who had joined the case were required to pursue their wage claims through individual arbitration. According to the company, each driver had “signed” an arbitration agreement when they clicked through their online onboarding paperwork before starting the job.
We opposed the motion, arguing that the delivery drivers did not even see the arbitration agreement that they allegedly signed unless they went out of their way to see it. We argued that there was no “meeting of the minds” between the drivers and the company.
Despite our arguments, the court ruled that the delivery drivers were required to pursue their claims in individual arbitration. We obviously disagree with this decision, but intend to proceed to arbitration and do our best to recover our clients’ unpaid wages and vehicle expenses through that process.