SkinSpirit Essential Wage and Hour Settlement
What happened
SkinSpirit Essential allegedly violated California wage and hour laws by improperly classifying employees or failing to pay required wages. The company is settling a class action lawsuit filed by former employee Sarah Rad on behalf of non-exempt employees who worked for the company.
Do you qualify?
Non-exempt employees who worked for SkinSpirit Essential in California during the Class Period (October 9, 2020 through March 1, 2026). For PAGA penalties, individuals employed during the PAGA Period (June 6, 2023 through April 15, 2026).
How to file
You do not need to do anything to participate and receive a payment. If you worked for SkinSpirit during the Class Period and/or PAGA Period, you are automatically eligible for an Individual Class Payment and/or Individual PAGA Payment. You can challenge the number of workweeks or pay periods worked by submitting a written challenge to the Administrator by July 27, 2026.
New to class actions?
This summary was generated from public settlement documents and may contain errors. Confirm eligibility, deadlines, and payment terms on the official settlement website before filing. ClaimWatch is not a law firm and this is not legal advice. Filing a claim is free.
More employment settlements
View all →Novant Health Timeclock Rounding Collective Action Settlement
Novant Health allegedly used a timeclock rounding policy from September 2021 through February 2023 that caused hourly employees to lose overtime pay. Novant Health denies wrongdoing and asserts all employees were fully and properly paid. The parties settled the dispute to avoid trial costs and risks.
Your proportional share of the settlement calculated based on your length of employment in an hourly position during the class period (September 19, 2021 through February 11, 2023). Up to $403,730 total is available for employee payouts.
80/20 ERISA Settlement
The lawsuit challenges whether the 80/20, Inc. Employee Stock Ownership Plan was properly administered and terminated by the defendants in accordance with ERISA (federal retirement law). The defendants are accused of violations in how they handled the Plan's administration and termination. Defendants deny all claims and admit no wrongdoing.
Petzing v. The Seven Motor Corporation Employment Application Settlement
Job applicants sued The Seven Motor Corporation for failing to disclose wage scales or salary ranges in job postings for open positions in Washington. The defendant disputes the claims and contends it has not violated any law.
Up to $2,172.30
EEOC v. Meathead Movers Age Discrimination Settlement
Meathead Movers allegedly engaged in age discrimination in hiring and recruitment in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) from at least 2017. The company has agreed to a settlement without admitting wrongdoing, providing up to $2 million to affected job applicants.
Up to $2 million total distributed to eligible applicants