In Lynch v. The City Of New York, the Southern District of New York decertified a conditionally certified FLSA collective of thirty Administrative Associates alleging, primarily, that they were not paid overtime for all hours worked. See No. 16-CV-5677 (KBF) (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 27, 2017). The Court’s decision hinged on the variation in facts necessary to establish an element of each plaintiff’s claim: whether the City had actual or constructive knowledge of the allegedly unpaid work.…

In Knox v. John Varvatos Enterprises, Inc., the Southern District of New York granted a Section 216(b) motion for conditional certification of an Equal Pay Act (“EPA”) collective consisting of female sales associates contending that their employer discriminatorily awarded a $12,000 annual clothing allowance to male employees but not female employees. See No. 17-CIV-772 (GHW) (GWG) (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 17, 2017). However, the Court declined to grant that aspect of the motion that sought equitable tolling…

In Perez v. City of New York, the City moved for summary judgment against a variety of FLSA claims advanced by a collective of Associate Urban Park Rangers related to unpaid wages. See No. 12-CIV-4914 (PAE) (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 27, 2017). The Court granted the motion in part and denied it in part ruling on a plethora of issues including the applicable statute of limitations, allegations of willfulness, and applicable tolling. However, one aspect – its…

In Cabrera v. Stephens, the Eastern District of New York conditionally certified an FLSA collective of 7-Eleven workers who alleged that their time records were manipulated and that they were not appropriately paid for all hours worked. See No. 16-CV-3234 (ADS) (SIL) (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 28, 2017). The motion for conditional certification was accompanied by a motion to strike declarations submitted by the employer of putative class/collective members who contended that they had been appropriately paid…

In Ramirez-Marin v. JD Classic Builders Corp., the Court addressed a procedurally esoteric question: can a named-plaintiff assert state law claims on behalf of persons who filed “opt-in consents” to participate in the FLSA portion of an action? The Court confirmed that opt-in plaintiffs, upon filing a consent, are deemed to assert all claims contained in the action. See No. 16-CV-5584 (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 30, 2017).…

In Lopes v. Heso, Inc., the Eastern District of New York addressed four discrete legal issues related to the dissemination of a notice to putative members of a conditionally certified collective. See No. 16-CV-6796 (MKB) (RML). Specifically, at the request of the parties, the Court addressed: (i) whether the notice should cover a three- or six-year period; (ii) the proper date for calculating the look back period; (iii) whether the employer would be required to…

In Lawtone-Bowles v. City of New York, the Southern District of New York granted in part, and denied in part, a Rule 12(b) motion to dismiss overtime claims advanced under the FLSA and New York Labor Law (“NYLL”). See No. 16-CV-4240 (AJN) (Sept. 22, 2017). The plaintiffs worked for the Department of Homeless Services as Motor Vehicle Operators responsible for transporting homeless persons to temporary housing placements, train stations, and airports. The plaintiffs were generally…