Search for: "ABM, INC." Results 1 - 20 of 90
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
2 Feb 2015, 4:00 am by Kimberly A. Kralowec
ABM Security Services, Inc., ___ Cal.App.4th ___ (Dec. 31, 2014; pub. ord. [read post]
21 Apr 2015, 8:00 am by Steven G. Pearl
ABM Security Services, Inc., --- Cal.App.4th --- (1/29/2015), the plaintiff, Augustus, worked as a security guard for the defendant, ABM. [read post]
2 Sep 2010, 6:31 am by Peter M. LaSorsa
ABM Industries Inc., pays the large amount of $5.8 million to 21 female former employees to settle a sexual harassment lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"). [read post]
3 Sep 2010, 2:02 am
ABM Industries, Inc., along with two subsidiaries, ABM Janitorial Services, Inc. and ABM Janitorial Services Northern California, Inc. will pay $5.8 million and provide other relief to a class of 21 Hispanic female janitorial workers, settling an egregious sexual harassment lawsuit filed by the U.S. [read post]
3 Sep 2010, 5:23 pm by Los Angeles Lawyer
Some women suffer in silence, but for some, like the female employees of ABM Industries Inc, it’s time to stand up for their rights. [read post]
13 Jan 2015, 9:45 am by Heather Wallace
ABM Security Services, Inc., the 2nd District Court of Appeal reversed the trial court, concluding that “on-call rest breaks are permissible. [read post]
23 Dec 2016, 1:46 pm by Kerry McCoy Friedrichs
ABM Security Services, Inc., affirming a $90 million judgment for the plaintiff class of security guards on their rest break claim. [read post]
4 May 2015, 1:45 pm by Gail Cecchettini Whaley
ABM Security Systems, Inc., the court ruled that an employer may require employees to remain “on-call” during rest periods without violating laws mandating paid breaks. [read post]
27 Dec 2016, 10:20 am by Seyfarth Shaw LLP
ABM Security Services, Inc., affirming a $90 million judgment for the plaintiff class of security guards on their rest break claim. [read post]
ABM Security Services, Inc., which reversed a near-$90 million judgment awarded in the favor of a certified class of current and former security guards on rest period claims, and also held that while “an on-call guard must return to duty if called to do so, [] remaining available to work is not the same as actually working. [read post]