Pret A Manger has agreed to pay almost $1m to settle a class action lawsuit for underpaying staff at its sandwich locations in New York.

The lawsuit was filed against the chain earlier this month alleging that the company violated US labour laws by rounding down staff working hours through an illegal practice called time-shaving, reported The Times.

The company decided to settle for $875,000 following mediation. It settled a similar lawsuit in 2014 by paying a $910,000 settlement.

In a statement, Pret A Manger told City AM: “We are absolutely committed to making sure all our team members are paid for all the hours that they work.”

“We are absolutely committed to making sure all our team members are paid for all the hours that they work.”

Earlier this month, the company introduced more comprehensive ingredient labelling on its products following the death of 15-year-old girl Natasha Ednan-Laperouse in 2016. The girl suffered a fatal cardiac arrest following an allergic reaction to sesame seeds within a Pret sandwich that were not listed on the product’s labelling. The British teenager purchased the item at a Pret outlet in Heathrow airport.

The company’s CEO Clive Schlee also faced criticism for the way he handled the situation.

How well do you really know your competitors?

Access the most comprehensive Company Profiles on the market, powered by GlobalData. Save hours of research. Gain competitive edge.

Company Profile – free sample

Thank you!

Your download email will arrive shortly

Not ready to buy yet? Download a free sample

We are confident about the unique quality of our Company Profiles. However, we want you to make the most beneficial decision for your business, so we offer a free sample that you can download by submitting the below form

By GlobalData
Visit our Privacy Policy for more information about our services, how we may use, process and share your personal data, including information of your rights in respect of your personal data and how you can unsubscribe from future marketing communications. Our services are intended for corporate subscribers and you warrant that the email address submitted is your corporate email address.

In addition, the company is involved in two other cases for allegedly misleading customers by labelling some of its products as ‘natural’ when they contained chemical glyphosate.