Posted on 07/09/2018 10:22:06 AM PDT by TaxPayer2000
MANHATTAN (CN) – A New Yorker who had been President Donald Trump’s personal driver for 20 years claims in court that the “purported” billionaire stiffed him on overtime.
Represented by the firm Davidoff Hutcher & Citron, the July 9 suit in Manhattan Supreme Court demands compensation for six years of service under the applicable statute of limitations.
The driver, Noel Cintron says he “was forced to work thousands of hours of overtime without compensation” before Secret Service took over the job of ferrying President Trump. Cintron no longer drives the president but his service to the Trump Organization allegedly continues as a member of its security staff.
For the last eight years, according to the complaint, Cintron has been earning $75,000 a year. This is up $7,000 from Cintron’s last raise in 2006, but the driver disputes that the 2010 salary was actually a raise since it came at the expense of his health insurance. By paying Cintron a little more, the Trump Organization allegedly saved itself $17,866.08 per year in premiums.
The first page of Cintron’s 14-page lawsuit is rife with indignation. “In an utterly callous display of unwarranted privilege and entitlement and without even a minimal sense of noblesse oblige President Donald Trump has, through the defendant entities, exploited and denied significant wages to his own longstanding personal driver,” it states.
Later the complaint says: “President Trump’s further callousness and cupidity is further demonstrated by the fact that while he is purportedly a billionaire, he has not given his personal driver a meaningful raise in over 12 years!”
This story is developing…
Your overtime cannot drop your hourly pay below minimum wage, even if you are salary.
If he has records, let him present them in court.
Right, what you said. Sounds like he was salaried at $75,000 and likely exempt from overtime laws.
The Marine Corps laughs at your misconception.
Correct. In fact a salaried position is almost always offered at a significantly higher wage as negotiated than if it was an hourly wage job as it is expected of you to attend the expected times of work that would normally be overtime charged.
I doubt he was on the clock 24/7/365.
Perhaps I missed it in reading the complaint, but if the driver was paid a salary, no overtime is due him. During his employment (and he is still employed), for 20 plus years, this never was an issue, why now?
Finally, as he was ON CALL for any and all issues related to transportation, I wonder if food and lodging were included, if he had a company credit card for his professional requirements as well as personal ones, and if this discussion had transpired previously with Trumps employee he reported to, or directly with Trump or his family. $36/hr to stand by waiting to drive someone somewhere, wash the car and keep it serviced, is an exceptional rate for anyone.
I am sure he had professional clothing provided for him, and cleaning provided as well, plus, over 20 years, had developed friendships with other staff and family.
It is highly suspicious that this cause of action should come at this time.
His suggested overtime rate as well, in this cause of action is not the total amount per hour, it is the Overtime rate, minus the straight time rate.
It is unclear if in a 55 hour week he was paid straight time rate for all 55 hours or only paid for 40 hours. If he is paid a salary and not hourly, he does not get paid Overtime. If he is paid hourly, he has to submit a time card for pay, and must be able to prove he was not paid overtime, and that he worked the hours, which means that the time card had to be signed by his direct supervision.
A dispute on hours would be raised when he worked the overtime hours and did not get paid for them sometime over the 20+ years he worked for the company.
Finally, more than likely he worked for the LLC and not for Trump personally, so the suit, IMO would have to be filed against the company, not Trump specifically.
I would not want this guy anywhere on my security staff. Certainly not before this pay matter was cleared up. This is the kind of Security Guard who hesitates to protect his employer, due to personal issues and long held grudges.
unreasonable delay in making an assertion or claim, such as asserting a right, claiming a privilege, or making an application for redress, which may result in refusal.
It seems like everyone who thinks they have a reason to sue Trump waited forever to do it.
>>“laches”? Did you mean “Leaches?”<<
LOL!! No it is allowing your rights to expire from inaction. It is NOT the same as statute of limitations.
In this case if the driver let 20 years go by without OT without a specific demand and/or a provable representation from the Trump organization (I am 100% sure Donald Trump himself does not directly hire his drivers and the like) that documents the OT was owing and due then the driver cannot recover.
Of course that doesn’t mean said driver cannot be bribed to file the suit to further Soros’ and others’ political agendas.
This is a mini stormy daniels story. Once the Trump legal team follows the money this dude will disappear with perjury charges hanging over his head and abuse of process charges over the lawyer.
what is a meaningful raise supposed to mean?
Technically, I have been since 1991 but it's only been "activated" a handful of times (some Saturdays, events to 2200 or starting at 0400) At the call of your REASONABLE employer is the understanding.
Great legal term, eh?
One of my favorites.
Were I reading this, this is the point at which I would have thrown the filing up in the air and said "fight it. Fight it until that guy doesn't have a dime left!"
Noblesse oblige, even tho it has the word "oblige" in it, is charity that is given because the giver has more than the givee and wants to be nice. It is not an obligation, it is a societal construct that keeps the peasants from rioting. It was practiced usually by royalty.
Calling someone out because you think they weren't charitable *enough* for you is just rude and stupid. I hope this guy gets nothing except huge legal bills. And then we'll find out what Demoncraps are behind this nothingburger.
This guy would make more money by writing a book about his experiences with Donald Trump.
Must have found a better gig.
Perqs? Room and board?
The chauffer may have a case. The majority of employers misuse the “Exempt” definition as defined in the FLSA. To be considered “Exempt”, an employee must meet three specific qualifications. The first is to be paid at least $23,600 per year, the second is that they must be paid on a salary basis, and the third is also required. That is, the employee must perform “exempt job duties”. These duties are where the majority of employers violate the law.
There are three typical categories of exempt job duties, called “executive,” “professional,” and “administrative.”
Exempt executive job duties.
Job duties are exempt executive job duties if the employee
1.regularly supervises two or more other employees, and also
2. has management as the primary duty of the position, and also,
3. has some genuine input into the job status of other employees (such as hiring, firing, promotions, or assignments).
Exempt professional job duties.
Professionally exempt work means work which is predominantly intellectual, requires specialized education, and involves the exercise of discretion and judgment. Professionally exempt workers must have education beyond high school, and usually beyond college, in fields that are distinguished from (more “academic” than) the mechanical arts or skilled trades.
Exempt Administrative job duties.
The most elusive and imprecise of the definitions of exempt job duties is for exempt “administrative” job duties.
The Regulatory definition provides that exempt administrative job duties are
(a) office or non-manual work, which is
(b) directly related to management or general business operations of the employer or the employer’s customers, and
(c) a primary component of which involves the exercise of independent judgment and discretion about
(d) matters of significance.
A chauffer would be hard pressed to fit into any of those molds unless the employer can reasonably demonstrate that the chauffer has had extensive professional training, manages at least 2 other chauffers’, or demonstrates independent judgement as a driver.
The tough nut for him to crack is why he agreed to this for 20 years and only now is pitching a fit.
Correct.
To harm employees and employers, the Obama Dept of Labor raised the threshold for Exempt Salaried employment to $47,476 (not sure when, but it’s been a few years). Mr. $75,000 a year has no legal basis for his claim. He and his lawyer know it. This is blackmail scheme; guys who don’t get paid off could get talkative. Both need to take a swim in cement shoes.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.