In a recent case, a federal judge in New York has allowed a class action to proceed for thousands of employees who allege that they were misclassified as exempt by an accounting firm. The case is entitled Pippins et al. v. KPMG LLP and was filed in the Southern District of New York. The judge also ordered that the Company turn over a computer-readable list of the names and contact information for possible opt-in plaintiffs.
The judge found there to be commonality because the accounting field is governed in large part by a number of regulations and standards that would render the plaintiffs as “similarly situated.” The court noted, however, that “the uniformity does not mean audit associates are entitled to overtime.” The Company has claimed that these employees are exempt under the administrative and/or professional exemptions. The Company also defended by asserting that, because each employee’s duties may have differed, there would be required an individualized scrutiny as to what each employee did, thus destroying the necessary element of commonality.
What is important is that the “individualized” defense may ultimately prove to be successful, although at the conditional certification step, a court is not focusing on these individual differences but rather looking at what elements of commonality may be present, such as similar educational backgrounds and similar training regimens.
The plaintiffs (naturally) contend that they performed clerical-type work, which was routine and repetitive. They claimed that “all” they do is do basic reviews of documents and financial records. I imagine the Company will defend not only on the individual scrutiny basis but will also try to knock out as many plaintiffs as it can but pointing to the higher levels of education they possess, the degrees and certificates, which will evidence that they do more than just “clerical” work and are using their advanced education (college or above) to conduct financial analyses, (which is the essence of an administrative or professional defense) and not just crunching numbers.