18th Annual Workplace Class Action Report - 2022 Edition

Annual Workplace Class Action Litigation Report: 2022 Edition 147 would require an individualized analysis to determine whether a particular FLSA violation took place. The Court ruled that the conclusory statements in the declarations were not sufficient evidence of a company-wide policy requiring employees to perform unpaid work. Id . at *17. Accordingly, the Court denied Plaintiff’s motion for conditional certification of a collective action. Morris, et al. v. Nationwide Children ’ s Hospital, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18291 (S.D. Ohio Feb. 1, 2021). Plaintiff, a psychometrician, filed a collective action alleging that Defendant failed to pay for meal breaks and failed to pay overtime compensation in violation of the FLSA. Plaintiff filed a motion for conditional certification of a collective action, which the Court granted. In support of her motion, Plaintiff offered her own declaration and the declarations of two other psychometricians. The declarations all attested that they were required to arrive 15 minutes before their scheduled shifts to prepare for appointments, including setting up the testing room, gathering materials, and receiving briefs from licensed psychologists. Id . at *2-3. The declarations also averred that employees were required to stay for at least 15 minutes after their shifts to wipe down materials, return testing kits, document and input testing data, and brief licensed psychologists about appointments. Id . at *3. Finally, the declarations asserted that psychometricians were often required to cut short or work through their unpaid lunch breaks. Plaintiff sought conditional certification of a collective action consisting of all psychometricians employed by Defendant over the previous three years. The Court found that Plaintiff met her burden to establish that she was similarly-situated to the members of the proposed collective action. The Court opined that Plaintiff provided evidence of a widespread unlawful policy or practice and included declarations supporting unpaid pre-shift, post-shift, and mealtime work and unpaid overtime. For these reasons, the Court granted Plaintiff’s motion for conditional certification of a collective action. Myres, et al. v. Hopebridge, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 121131 (S.D. Ohio June 29, 2021). Plaintiffs, a group of healthcare workers, filed a collective action alleging that Defendant failed to pay overtime compensation in violation of the FLSA. Plaintiffs filed a motion for conditional certification of a collective action, which the Court granted. Plaintiffs requested conditional certification of a collective action consisting of all employees with the job title of Registered Behavior Technician (“RBT”) who worked more than 40 hours in a workweek without receiving overtime compensation. In support of their motion, Plaintiffs offered nine declarations in which they detailed similar experiences of RBTs who worked at Defendant’s therapy centers. Plaintiffs also submitted Defendant’s employee handbook, including a policy they alleged violated the FLSA, i.e. , requiring employees to clock-out for breaks exceeding 15 minutes. Defendant argued that the Court lacked personal jurisdiction over Defendant as to the claims of out-of-state opt-in Plaintiffs. Plaintiff also argued that the collective action as defined was overly broad. As to the jurisdictional issue, the Court determined an FLSA claim is a federal claim created by Congress to address employment practices nationwide, that Congress created a mechanism for employees to bring their claims on behalf of other employees who are "similarly-situated," and that Congress in no way limited those claims to in-state Plaintiffs. The Court thus found that it had personal jurisdiction as to the claims of out-of-state opt-in Plaintiffs. The Court further held that it would not resolve factual disputes asserted by Defendant as defenses at this stage of the litigation. The Court ruled that Plaintiffs met their burden to establish that they were similarly-situated to the membership of the proposed collective action. The Court thus granted Plaintiffs’ motion for conditional certification of a collective action. Phelps, et al. v. Sumiriko Tennessee, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72926 (E.D. Tenn. March 16, 2021). Plaintiff, an hourly-paid production associate, filed a collective action alleging that Defendant failed to pay overtime compensation in violation of the FLSA. After Plaintiff filed a motion for conditional certification of a collective action, the parties stipulated to conditional certification of a collective action. The Court undertook an independent analysis of whether the motion was appropriate for purposes of 29 U.S.C. § 216(b). It found that Plaintiff made the requisite showing to establish that all hourly-paid production associates at Defendant’s Tazewell, Tennessee facility from September 24, 2018, until the present were similarly-situated for purposes of conditional certification . Accordingly, the Court granted the motion for conditional certification of a collective action. Pippen, et al. v. Global Technical Recruiters, Inc., 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 111392 (N.D. Ohio June 14, 2021). Plaintiff, an hourly laborer, filed a collective action alleging that Defendant failed to pay for pre-shift meetings, for time spent donning and doffing of personal protective gear and deducted 15-minutes of pay if