There was another part of Morel’s problem with HNTB that didn’t concern the national, multi-industry issue of who pays for business-related expenses when employees work from home.

In 2021, Morel’s lawyer had written a letter to HNTB covering the reimbursement issue but also claiming that during the seven months he was employed he had been verbally harassed by a document controls administrator he supervised and that the company wrongfully terminated him. The attorney proposed a six-figure settlement.

What became of Morel’s harassment and discrimination allegations isn't clear. HNTB officials and the company's attorney on the case could not be reached for a comment in time for the posting of this story. Morel himself could not be reached via a message sent on LinkedIn and his attorney was not immediately available to comment.

The central argument in Morel's harassment and wrongful termination charges was his accusation that the document controls administrator he supervised made derogatory remarks about his Australian origin and  accent.
 

Morel’s Hiring and Experience

Morel’s seven-month stint with the Kansas City, Mo.-based design powerhouse, according to a local California website, began when HNTB hired him in January 2021. Educated in Australia, with a degree in construction management, his chief responsibility was to supervise the documents control team on the I-10 San Bernardino Transportation Authority Express Lanes project in Ontario. HNTB provided project and construction management services on the project.

During his employment, Morel claims, the document controls administrator mocked his accent and made derogatory remarks, such as referencing "Crocodile Dundee" and calling him "the man from down under" in front of colleagues.

Morel reported her behavior to supervisors and a human resource manager in multiple emails, according to his attorney’s letter to HNTB. Despite Morel’s attempts to counsel the administrator as her supervisor, Morel alleges, she resisted criticism and HNTB managers he complained to failed to respond or investigate. One HNTB staff member advised Morel to ignore the behavior, he claimed, and no action was taken even after he emailed a project controls leader alleging discrimination as the “only foreign citizen” on the project. After he had been with the company for seven months, HNTB terminated him, he claims, in retaliation for his complaints about harassment and unreimbursed expenses. His proposal that HNTB pay him $120,000 was intended to settle Morel’s harassment, wrongful termination and unreimbursed expenses claims.

Remote Expenses: A National Issue

Morel v. HNTB reflects a shifting landscape in compensating professional workers for remote work expenses. The COVID-19 pandemic normalized remote work, with 52% of U.S. workers on hybrid schedules and 24% working fully remote, per a 2025 Gallup poll. The Society for Human Resource Management’s 2024 survey notes 60% of firms now have formal remote work policies.

Some employers argue high earners should cover the cost of their own tools, but technology and communication tools and platforms complicate the issue. 

California has some of the strictest wage and expense rules. New York’s Labor Law 198-c covers business-related expenses. Illinois’ Wage Payment Act mandates work-related cost reimbursement.

Sometimes what is reimbursed is decided in courts. In 2024, a Massachusetts’ case resulted in a $1.2 million award for internet costs and in 2023 a Texas’ case settled for $900,000 over equipment expenses. Some cities, such as Seattle and San Francisco, have their ordinances covering remote work expenses.

Federally, the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) does not cover remote-work reimbursement rules but a recent 2023 Dept. of Labor guidance warns employers that unpaid expenses violate wage laws and may trigger liability.
 

The Morel Class-Action Lawsuit

Morel originally filed his lawsuit in San Diego Superior Court but it was subsequently moved to federal court. Citing a California labor code requiring employers to reimburse employees for necessary expenses incurred while performing their job duties, Morel alleged that the phone costs borne by remote employees supported work tasks like email access and team communication.

Initially, Morel claimed in his lawsuit, other home office expenses such as rent and utilities should be reimbursed, too. He suggested that all 839 HNTB California remote-work employees over four years should be reimbursed. 

HNTB mounted its defense on several fronts.

The company challenged Morel’s standing as a plaintiff because he no longer worked for HNTB. It also said Morel's characterization of the class-action employee group was undefined, with no specifics about their roles in the company. That, HNTB argued, undermined their right to compensation and their right to recover damages for state labor code violations under the state’ Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA). 

 

HNTB was partially successful in avoiding Morel’s broader claims for compensation and in November 2022, the court allowed an amended complaint focused solely on cell phone and internet costs. The following year, Morel’s and HNTB's attorneys tried mediation and didn’t get anywhere but then in subsequent settlement conferences, with the help of a mediator and a judge, the two sides reached terms for a settlement.

Under Judge Anthony J. Battaglia’s evaluation of the $490,000 settlement, the agreement provides $300 to $360 per employee. Other aspects of the deal still have to be finalized. Attorneys’ fees, requested at $161,700, could be reduced to $122,500. HNTB may be required to pay $49,000 to the state.

Finally, Morel may receive a $5,000 to $10,000 incentive award, which is customary in successful California class action lawsuits. That payment, like most of the other details, will be discussed and likely debated in the July hearing.