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

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

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,

The issue of payment (or not) for undergoing security checks has been a hot item of late, especially since the US Supreme Court issued its momentous decision in Integrity Staffing Solutions v. Busk. Now, these controversies have taken on a new tweak with COVID-related screenings. In a recent case, a group of workers are

There have been a host of federal cases recently focusing on whether time spent waiting in security lines is compensable. Some have gone for the plaintiffs and others for the employer, as these cases are nuanced and fact-sensitive. A recent example of this genre is a Nike case where the Company will pay $8.25 million

The employer who is fighting a collective or class action must make the argument that there is too much of a need for individual scrutiny to allow a class to proceed.  There are times that argument works, and times it does not.  An Illinois federal Judge has recently conditionally certified a class of logistics workers