Are You Being Paid All the Overtime Wages You Earned?

Employees may be owed overtime pay when an employer calculates their regular rate of pay incorrectly. The issue can arise when certain payments are treated as expense reimbursements rather than wages, potentially reducing the overtime rate.

A recent example involves travel nurses. In Egan v. Fastaff, LLC, a federal wage and hour class and collective action in Colorado, nurses alleged that Fastaff paid stipends that functioned as wages, but excluded those amounts when calculating overtime pay. Fastaff disputed that characterization, maintaining that the stipends were expense reimbursements.

On October 23, 2026, the plaintiffs requested preliminary court approval of a proposed $7 million settlement covering approximately 6,600 travel nurses. According to the motion, the estimated average payment would exceed $650 after deductions, with a $100 minimum payment.

Concerned About Your Pay or Overtime?

If your employer failed to pay overtime, excluded certain compensation when calculating your overtime rate, or otherwise underpaid your wages, you may have rights under federal or state wage and hour laws. Whether particular payments must be included in overtime calculations depends on the circumstances and applicable law.

Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. represents employees in wage and hour matters involving alleged unpaid wages, overtime violations, and other allegedly unlawful compensation practices. Employees concerned about their pay or overtime are encouraged to contact our firm to discuss their potential legal rights.

For a free, no-obligation legal evaluation:

Michael Yarnoff, Esq.
(215) 792-6676, Ext. 804
[email protected]
[email protected]

About Kehoe Law Firm, P.C.

Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is a nationally recognized, plaintiff-side class action law firm representing investors, consumers, and employees in matters involving securities fraud, corporate misconduct, mergers and acquisitions, antitrust violations, whistleblower claims, data breaches, consumer fraud, employment law violations, as well as ERISA and retirement plan litigation. Its attorneys have served as lead or co-lead counsel in major securities cases, recovering more than $10 billion for institutional and individual investors.

Kehoe Law Firm’s class action legal services are provided on a contingency-fee basis, meaning plaintiffs are not responsible for attorneys’ fees or litigation expenses. Any request for attorneys’ fees and expenses will be subject to court approval.

PHONE

Tel: 215-792-6676

EMAIL

[email protected]

What Are 401(k) Forfeitures?

When employees leave a job before becoming fully vested in employer retirement plan contributions, the unvested portion may be forfeited. These forfeitures remain plan assets. Subject to applicable rules and the plan’s terms, they may be used to pay eligible plan expenses, reduce employer contributions, or provide additional benefits to participants. Forfeitures are a lawful feature of many 401(k) plans, but legal disputes may arise over how plan fiduciaries decide to use them.

ERISA Fiduciary Duties and the Forfeiture Issue

The Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) requires plan fiduciaries to act prudently and loyally in the interests of participants and beneficiaries when performing fiduciary functions. Recent lawsuits challenge whether decisions to use forfeitures to reduce employer contributions, rather than pay plan expenses, violate those duties.

Recent 401(k) Forfeiture Litigation

United Rentals — In Forrest v. United Rentals (North America), Inc., the plaintiff, in a complaint filed on October 20, 2026, alleges that plan fiduciaries used substantially all of more than $14.3 million in forfeitures from 2020 through 2025 to offset employer matching contributions, while participants paid more than $8.68 million in plan expenses. According to the complaint, those forfeitures could have covered all participant-paid plan expenses, leaving more than $5.6 million available to reduce employer contributions. The complaint also challenges a December 2024 plan amendment, retroactive to January 2024, requiring forfeitures to be used first to offset employer contributions. Separately, the plaintiff alleges excessive recordkeeping fees of approximately $55 to $61 per participant annually, compared with an average of approximately $40 among identified comparable plans. 

Providence Health & Services — In Halter v. Providence Health & Services, the court granted final approval in an October 21, 2026 Order of a class-action settlement involving retirement plan forfeitures. The court described the settlement’s approximate total monetary value as $42.7 million and found the settlement fair, reasonable, and adequate. The settlement resolved the litigation without a judicial finding that the defendants violated ERISA.

Why This Matters

These cases illustrate how decisions about forfeited contributions and retirement plan expenses can affect participants’ savings. They do not establish that using forfeitures to reduce employer contributions is always unlawful.

Questions About Your 401(k) Plan?

If you believe your 401(k) plan may have charged excessive fees or improperly used forfeited contributions, contact Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. to discuss your concerns and potential legal claims.

For a free, no-obligation legal evaluation, contact:

Michael Yarnoff, Esq.
(215) 792-6676, Ext. 804
[email protected]
[email protected]

About Kehoe Law Firm, P.C.

Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is a nationally-recognized, plaintiff-side class action law firm representing investors and consumers in matters involving securities fraud, corporate misconduct, mergers and acquisitions, antitrust violations, whistleblower claims, data breaches, consumer fraud, employment law violations, as well as ERISA and retirement plan litigation. Its attorneys have served as lead or co-lead counsel in major securities cases, recovering more than $10 billion for institutional and individual investors.

Kehoe Law Firm’s class action legal services are provided on a contingency-fee basis, meaning plaintiffs are not responsible for attorneys’ fees or litigation expenses. Any request for attorneys’ fees and expenses will be subject to court approval. 

PHONE

Tel: 215-792-6676

EMAIL

[email protected]

Did You Pay a Compass Group Tobacco Surcharge?

Current and former employees who paid tobacco surcharges through the Compass Group Medical Plan may be affected by a federal court ruling under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA).

Federal Court Rules for Plan Participants

On October 16, 2026, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri granted in part the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment and denied Compass Group USA, Inc.’s motion in Mehlberg et al. v. Compass Group USA, Inc., No. 2:24-cv-04179-SRB. The court ruled in plaintiffs’ favor on all six ERISA claims but did not determine a damages amount.

Compass Group charged medical plan participants who identified as tobacco users an additional $12 per week in 2016 and $24 per week beginning in 2017, according to the Order.

What Did the Court Find?

The court ruled that Compass Group violated ERISA by failing, from 2016 through 2023, to refund earlier tobacco surcharges when participants completed an alternative requirement, such as a tobacco cessation course. The court also found that plan materials lacked required information about ways to avoid the surcharge or physician accommodations, depending on the plan year.

The court also found that the payroll deductions were plan assets and that Compass Group breached its fiduciary duties by keeping the funds in its general assets instead of holding them in trust. Plaintiffs also prevailed on claims involving the medical plan’s terms.

What Does This Mean for Plan Participants?

ERISA does not ban all tobacco surcharges. Employers may impose them through wellness programs that meet federal requirements, including rules about alternatives to avoid the surcharge and required disclosures.

The parties agreed that Compass Group collected $47,960,937.87 in tobacco surcharges from January 1, 2016, through May 20, 2026. That figure is not a damages award; the court deferred deciding the amount of monetary relief.

What Employees Should Know About Tobacco and Nicotine Surcharges

If you paid a tobacco surcharge through an employer-sponsored health plan, contact Kehoe Law Firm to learn about your potential rights under ERISA.

Paying a surcharge does not, by itself, establish a legal violation. Whether a particular surcharge may warrant legal review depends on the plan documents and disclosures, whether ERISA’s wellness-program requirements were satisfied, including requirements concerning a reasonable alternative standard, and how the program was administered.

For a free, no-obligation legal evaluation, contact:

Michael Yarnoff, Esq.
(215) 792-6676, Ext. 804
[email protected]
[email protected]

About Kehoe Law Firm, P.C.

Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is a nationally-recognized, plaintiff-side class action law firm representing investors and consumers in matters involving securities fraud, corporate misconduct, mergers and acquisitions, antitrust violations, whistleblower claims, data breaches, consumer fraud, employment law violations, as well as ERISA and retirement plan litigation. Its attorneys have served as lead or co-lead counsel in major securities cases, recovering more than $10 billion for institutional and individual investors.

Kehoe Law Firm’s class action legal services are provided on a contingency-fee basis, meaning plaintiffs are not responsible for attorneys’ fees or litigation expenses. Any request for attorneys’ fees and expenses will be subject to court approval. 

PHONE

Tel: 215-792-6676

EMAIL

[email protected]

Athleta and Gap Face Class Action Alleging Unpaid Wages and Missed Breaks

On October 13, 2026, a class action complaint for unpaid wages was filed in King County Superior Court against Athleta, LLC, The Gap, Inc., and GPS Services, Inc., alleging violations of Washington State wage and hour laws affecting hourly-paid or non-exempt employees. The lawsuit seeks unpaid wages on behalf of the plaintiff and other allegedly similarly situated workers.

What Does the Lawsuit Allege?

The action, Herrera v. Athleta, LLC, et al., No. 26-2-33532-0 SEA (Wash. Super. Ct., King Cnty.), alleges that the defendants failed to provide required rest and meal breaks, pay minimum wages for all hours worked, and pay overtime wages when employees worked more than 40 hours in a workweek. It also alleges failures to accrue paid sick leave or allow its use for qualifying absences, along with unlawful wage deductions and rebates from employees’ wages.

Who Is Included in the Proposed Class?

The proposed statewide class includes all hourly-paid or non-exempt employees of the defendants in Washington at any time from three years before the complaint was filed through the final disposition of the action.

The lawsuit also proposes a Seattle, Washington subclass consisting of hourly-paid or non-exempt employees of the defendants in Washington who worked in the City of Seattle during that same period. The complaint specifies certain exclusions from both proposed groups.

What Should Washington Employees Know About Their Wage and Hour Rights?

Washington wage and hour laws provide protections involving meal and rest periods, pay for hours worked, overtime compensation, paid sick leave, and wage deductions. Whether an employee has a claim depends on the applicable law and the circumstances of their employment.

Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. represents employees in wage and hour matters involving alleged unpaid wages, overtime violations, and other unlawful compensation practices. Employees who believe they have been denied required meal or rest breaks, proper wages or overtime, paid sick leave, or other compensation may have rights under state and federal law and are encouraged to contact our firm to discuss their circumstances.

For a free, no-obligation legal evaluation:

Michael Yarnoff, Esq.
(215) 792-6676, Ext. 804
[email protected]
[email protected]

About Kehoe Law Firm, P.C.

Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is a nationally recognized, plaintiff-side class action law firm representing investors, consumers, and employees in matters involving securities fraud, corporate misconduct, mergers and acquisitions, antitrust violations, whistleblower claims, data breaches, consumer fraud, employment law violations, as well as ERISA and retirement plan litigation. Its attorneys have served as lead or co-lead counsel in major securities cases, recovering more than $10 billion for institutional and individual investors.

Kehoe Law Firm’s class action legal services are provided on a contingency-fee basis, meaning plaintiffs are not responsible for attorneys’ fees or litigation expenses. Any request for attorneys’ fees and expenses will be subject to court approval.

PHONE

Tel: 215-792-6676

EMAIL

[email protected]

Target Wage and Hour Lawsuit: Judge Allows Unpaid Walking Time Claims to Proceed //

On October 16, 2026, U.S. District Judge Tiffany M. Cartwright denied Target Corporation’s (“Target”) motion to dismiss a proposed class action brought by hourly employees at its Washington distribution centers. The employees allege they were not paid for required activities at the beginning and end of their workdays.

What Did Target Workers Allege?

According to the amended complaint, as summarized in the court’s Order on Motion to Dismiss (the “Order”), Target distribution center employees must pass through security procedures, swipe their badges, and follow designated painted walkways to reach their time clocks and assigned departments. While using these walkways, employees allegedly are prohibited from using cellphones or other personal devices and must walk rather than run.

Plaintiffs estimate approximately 10 minutes from swiping their badges to enter the distribution center to reaching their departments: five minutes from the distribution center doors to the time clocks and another five minutes from the time clocks to their departments. The Order also describes an allegation of approximately five minutes of walking after shifts. Plaintiffs allege that Target does not compensate them for the disputed time.

What Did the Judge Rule?

The court found that the plaintiffs plausibly alleged they were “on duty” during the disputed periods under Washington law. The judge explained that whether employees are on duty depends on the extent to which their employer controls their time and restricts their personal activities.

Target argued that its walking restrictions were basic safety precautions. The court concluded that the safety purpose of those restrictions did not necessarily determine whether employees were under Target’s control.

The judge denied Target’s motion to dismiss, allowing the plaintiffs’ claims for unpaid wages, failure to timely pay final wages, and willful withholding of wages to proceed. The ruling did not determine whether Target violated wage laws or certify a class.

When Must Employers Pay Workers for Time Spent on Required Activities?

Federal and state wage and hour laws generally require employers to compensate employees for covered working time, which may include certain activities performed before or after scheduled shifts. Whether that time is compensable depends on the applicable law and specific circumstances, including the nature of the activities and the employer’s control over employees’ time. Failure to compensate employees for legally required working time may give rise to unpaid wage and overtime claims.

Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. represents employees in wage and hour matters involving alleged unpaid wages, overtime violations, and other unlawful compensation practices. Employees who believe they have not been properly compensated for all hours worked may have legal rights under federal or state wage and hour laws are encouraged to contact our firm. 

For a free, no-obligation legal evaluation:

Michael Yarnoff, Esq.
(215) 792-6676, Ext. 804
[email protected]
[email protected]

About Kehoe Law Firm, P.C.

Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is a nationally recognized, plaintiff-side class action law firm representing investors, consumers, and employees in matters involving securities fraud, corporate misconduct, mergers and acquisitions, antitrust violations, whistleblower claims, data breaches, consumer fraud, employment law violations, as well as ERISA and retirement plan litigation. Its attorneys have served as lead or co-lead counsel in major securities cases, recovering more than $10 billion for institutional and individual investors.

Kehoe Law Firm’s class action legal services are provided on a contingency-fee basis, meaning plaintiffs are not responsible for attorneys’ fees or litigation expenses. Any request for attorneys’ fees and expenses will be subject to court approval.

PHONE

Tel: 215-792-6676

EMAIL

[email protected]