Where the Money Goes
Of the $9.1 million pot:
-
$3.1 million is earmarked for attorney fees
-
$82,000 covers litigation expenses
-
$15,000 goes to lead plaintiff Tiffany Hill
-
$3,000 to newly added plaintiff Michelle Anderson
-
$34,500 to $46,000 is budgeted for settlement administration, depending on whether one or two rounds of distributions are needed
The Root of the Dispute: ABC Pay Plan
The case traces its origin to 2012, when Hill first filed suit. The core issue? Xerox’s ABC plan, which compensated employees based on completed tasks and awarded bonuses to meet minimum wage thresholds — but failed to pay for so-called “unproductive” work, such as logging in or waiting between calls.
In 2014, U.S. District Judge John C. Coughenour denied Xerox’s motion concerning how to interpret its pay structure. The issue escalated to the Ninth Circuit in 2017, which then punted the question to the Washington Supreme Court due to its reliance on state law.
In a nuanced decision, the state’s highest court concluded that the ABC plan was not a traditional piecework system but did not offer a clear alternative classification. That ambiguity lingered until February 2024, when Judge Coughenour ruled in favor of characterizing the ABC plan as an hourly compensation scheme — a pivotal turning point.
A month later, the court granted summary judgment to the workers, finding Xerox’s payment model violated the Washington Minimum Wage Act.
