By: Derek Hawkins//January 19, 2016//
7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Case Name: Peter Enger, et al. v. Chicago Carriage Cab Corp., et al
Case No.: 15-1057
Officials: FLAUM, WILLIAMS, and SYKES, Circuit Judges.
Practice Area: Class Action – Wage & Payment Collection Act – Contract
Employment agreement did not require compensation to drivers.
“Because the drivers have not shown that they are entitled to wages from defendants, their argument that defendants made improper deductions from their wages by requiring them to pay fees and expenses fails as a matter of law. Defendants do not pay the drivers’ wages and so they cannot be sued for taking deductions from those non-existent wages. More broadly, it is inaccurate to characterize the shift fees and other expenses that the drivers voluntarily pay to operate defendants’ cabs as a deduction. Instead, the drivers’ payment of fees and expenses is the consideration offered in exchange for the right to lease a cab and medallion under the parties’ implicit agreement. And although the drivers agreed to pay those fees and expenses, they now attempt to use the IWPCA to rewrite the terms of their employment agreement. But again, the IWPCA provides no substantive relief beyond what the underlying employment contract requires. In other words, the IWPCA exists to hold the employer to his promise under the employment agreement; by asking the judiciary to graft new terms into an employment contract without employer’s consent, the drivers turn the IWPCA on its head”
Affirmed