Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)

I have many clients that want to comply with the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) and pay workers properly, especially for overtime. However, I have found that even the most well-intentioned employers sometimes will not consider the nuances and vagaries of overtime calculations under the FLSA and a class action is the result. In this

When two entities are a joint employer, or could be deemed as such, they must aggregate the hours worked by employees at each facility in a given week. If those hours exceed forty in total, then overtime must be paid. Sometimes, the entities either believe they are not a joint employer or, simply, do not

Many employers believe that if an employee (or many employees) perform a tiny amount of work, or work-like activity, before their shifts, that brief off-the-clock, activity cannot be “working time” under the FLSA. This is the essence of the de minimis defense. Well, they are wrong, as a recent case illustrates. The case also is

I have written about call center cases, which involve allegedly unpaid working time, many times. Well, they continue to pop up. In a recent case, a class of workers claim that they were expected/required to handle customer calls after the end of their shifts, during their break times, as well as performing additional off-the-clock tasks.

The thorny issue of what constitutes “working time” is always causing headaches for employers and the pandemic period has increased these concerns greatly, with demands made for compensation for testing time, vaccination time. A class action has been recently filed, seeking compensation for workers in a meatpacking plant who want pay for time spent being

Another administrative exemption case, this time in the trucking industry, tests the contours of that vague, nuanced exemption and to what occupations it applies. In this case, a group of Logistics Coordinators contend they are not within the exemption because their primary duty was making sales and they were not paid on a salaried basis,

In a chicken-and-egg type of case, an unusual case, the Third Circuit has emphatically held a Judge taking over a class action case must deal with the threshold issue of whether a class should be certified prior to a trial commencing on the collective claims of the class. The Court sternly warned that if this

I always tell clients they must comply with both federal and state law, whatever State they are situate in, that complying with one is not a defense to not complying with the other, tougher, law. A sterling example of this concept has just arisen in a travel time case. Travel time issues are often murky,

When I, as a management-side practitioner, defend a FLSA class action, the contingency I fear is that a court might find that the violation was “willful,” thereby extending the two-year statute of limitations to a third year. A recent case shows just how hard a defendant will fight against that third year. In this case,

The issue of misclassification of workers as exempt when they might not be has been around for a very long time. Another class of such workers has been certified in the health care industry. The federal Judge has granted final certification to two classes of workers claiming they are entitled to overtime. The classes will