A lawsuit filed in 2021 by an Illinois truck driver for a unit of Common Logistics over the strict Illinois biometric regulation has been granted class standing.
The biometric regulation within the Land of Lincoln has lengthy been thought of essentially the most stringent within the nation and has been referred to as “a risk to enterprise.”
It has been the main target of different trucking-related litigation, together with a case in opposition to in-cab video firm Lytx that resulted in payouts to hundreds of drivers of between about $650 and $850 per individual.
Brandon Willis was a driver for Common Intermodal Providers, which is a subsidiary of publicly-traded Common Logistics (NASDAQ: ULH). He filed his lawsuit in 2021 in U.S. Federal District Court docket for the Northern District of Illinois on behalf of himself and different drivers over the corporate’s use of a fingerprint scanner on the firm’s Harvey, Illinois facility.
Common Intermodal is the lead defendant. However the checklist of defendants was widened from the preliminary lawsuit in an amended August 2023 criticism to incorporate HR-1 LLC (an arm of the personal enterprise of Matthew Moroun, who owns about 70% of Common), Common Administration Providers, Inc. and Information System Providers, an outdoor firm that offered biometric providers to Common.
On the core of the dispute and lawsuit was whether or not Common was violating the provisions of Illinois’ Biometric Privateness Act (BIPA), which was handed in 2008 and amended in 2024.
Time in query goes again greater than 10 years
The extra fast query dominated on by Choose Elaine E. Bucklo was whether or not the Willis lawsuit might turn out to be a category motion, taking in not simply Common workers however different staff doing enterprise with Common who “clocked in” to the corporate’s system between March 30, 2016 via the current.
Choose Bucklo’s choice on the category standing solely tangentially touched on the problems raised in Willis’ lawsuit.
Nevertheless, she does recap a number of the fundamentals of the lawsuit and the alleged violation of BIPA.
BIPA, in accordance with Choose Bucklo, requires that no matter entity is gathering biometric data should inform that individual whose data is collected in writing, and obtain a written launch concerning assortment and retention of the biometric information.
The Willis lawsuit alleges that the defendants within the case “took actions that straight violated the BIPA,” in accordance with Choose Bucklo. Among the different defendants are vicariously liable “for the BIPA violations of others, and a few could also be each.”
Within the amended lawsuit, Willis mentioned the defendants “directed, licensed, and coordinated the seize and assortment of the fingerprints of staff and different individuals on the Illinois Amenities by requiring the employees and different individuals to make use of Biometric Scanners to clock in and clock out every day.” They did so, the lawsuit says, “with out the required consent of the individuals being scanned.”
Simply workers, or others
The important thing query Choose Bucklo determined was the scope of the category motion and whether or not it might embrace simply Common workers or any individuals who had their fingerprints scanned the place the corporate operated.
By granting the broader definition of the category, Choose Bucklo introduced in a bunch of people that will likely be greater than 50% of the now bigger variety of plaintiffs. As she famous in her choice, “most” of the employees who had their fingerprints scanned labored both for a corporation referred to as LINC–a Common Logistics subsidiary that was not named as a defendant–or a third-party staffing company.
The extension of the category to non-Common workers, Choose Bucklo wrote, is as a result of “plaintiff is suing Intermodal not as a result of Intermodal was his employer however as a result of Intermodal is the entity that allegedly collected shops, and/or transmitted his biometrics with out complying with BIPA’s procedural safeguards.”
That might be the idea for increasing the category to incorporate non-Intermodal workers, which Choose Bucklo in the end did.
One other Illinois case involving trucking and BIPA, introduced in late 2024 by driver Floyd Eskridge who sought a category motion in opposition to HMD Trucking, was settled out of courtroom late final yr. That case additionally was within the Northern District.
Extra articles by John Kingston
Teamsters declare victory over Amazon at NLRB, subsequent step possible tougher
Newest transfer by FMCSA suggests Motus rollout woes are persevering with
After a five-year wait, C.H. Robinson makes a dealer acquisition
The put up Driver’s biometrics case in opposition to ULH expands to class motion appeared first on BigRig.