38 Cited authorities

Hoffmann-La Roche Inc. v. Sperling
493 U.S. 165 (1989) Cited 2,999 times 19 Legal Analyses
Holding that district courts have discretion to implement § 216(b)
Anderson v. Mt. Clemens Pottery Co.
328 U.S. 680 (1946) Cited 2,577 times 58 Legal Analyses
Holding that, where employer's records are inadequate, "an employee has carried out his burden if he proves that he has in fact performed work for which he was improperly compensated and if he produces sufficient evidence to show the amount and extent of that work as a matter of just and reasonable inference."
Morgan v. Family Dollar
551 F.3d 1233 (11th Cir. 2008) Cited 910 times 8 Legal Analyses
Holding that sufficient evidence supported jury's determination that Family Dollar Store Managers were nonexempt employees
Thiessen v. Gen. Elec. Capital Corp.
267 F.3d 1095 (10th Cir. 2001) Cited 999 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding as long as the EEOC and the company are aware of the nature and scope of the allegations, the purposes behind the administrative filing requirement are satisfied and no injustice or contravention of congressional intent occurs by allowing piggybacking
Grayson v. K Mart Corp.
79 F.3d 1086 (11th Cir. 1996) Cited 779 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that an individual who did not file an EEOC charge may opt into an ADEA class action by "piggybacking" onto a timely charge filed by one of the named plaintiffs, provided that the claims of the named plaintiff and the piggybacking plaintiff arise out of similar discriminatory treatment in the same time frame
Fegley v. Higgins
19 F.3d 1126 (6th Cir. 1994) Cited 286 times
Holding that an individual who "controlled significant functions of the business, and determined salaries and made hiring decisions" was an employer
Chao v. Gotham Registry, Inc.
514 F.3d 280 (2d Cir. 2008) Cited 157 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that time sheets indicating overtime and submitted to an employer on a weekly basis communicated to the employer that employees were working overtime
Falcon v. Starbucks Corp.
580 F. Supp. 2d 528 (S.D. Tex. 2008) Cited 134 times
Holding that substantial evidence of an informal policy abiding or encouraging unpaid overtime could support conditional certification despite the existence of an official "time worked is time paid" policy
Bell v. Farmers Insurance Exchange
115 Cal.App.4th 715 (Cal. Ct. App. 2004) Cited 123 times 7 Legal Analyses
Upholding as consistent with due process the use of surveys and statistical analysis to measure a defendant's aggregate liability under the IWC's wage orders
Heckler v. DK Funding, LLC
502 F. Supp. 2d 777 (N.D. Ill. 2007) Cited 98 times
Holding that such an argument "puts the cart before the horse" and "does not make sense [because i]t would essentially force plaintiffs or their attorneys to issue their own form of informal notice or to otherwise go out and solicit other plaintiffs"
Rule 23 - Class Actions
Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 Cited 34,823 times 1232 Legal Analyses
Holding that, to certify a class, the court must find that "questions of law or fact common to class members predominate over any questions affecting only individual members"
Section 216 - Penalties
29 U.S.C. § 216 Cited 16,318 times 140 Legal Analyses
Holding employers liable for “unpaid minimum wages, or their unpaid overtime compensation”
Section 254 - Relief from liability and punishment under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, the Walsh-Healey Act, and the Bacon-Davis Act for failure to pay minimum wage or overtime compensation
29 U.S.C. § 254 Cited 713 times 44 Legal Analyses
Precluding compensation for certain travel that "occur either prior to the time on any particular workday at which such employee commences, or subsequent to the time on any particular workday at which he ceases, such principal activity or activities"
Section 785.48 - Use of time clocks
29 C.F.R. § 785.48 Cited 147 times 27 Legal Analyses
Requiring employers to compensate employees for "all the time they have actually worked"
Section 785.24 - Principles noted in Portal-to-Portal Bulletin
29 C.F.R. § 785.24 Cited 29 times 1 Legal Analyses
Providing examples of tasks that are compensable under the integral and indispensable test

Russell v. Illinois Bell Telephone Company

38 Cited authorities

Holding that district courts have discretion to implement § 216(b)

Holding that sufficient evidence supported jury's determination that Family Dollar Store Managers were nonexempt employees

Holding as long as the EEOC and the company are aware of the nature and scope of the allegations, the purposes behind the administrative filing requirement are satisfied and no injustice or contravention of congressional intent occurs by allowing piggybacking

Holding that an individual who "controlled significant functions of the business, and determined salaries and made hiring decisions" was an employer

Holding that time sheets indicating overtime and submitted to an employer on a weekly basis communicated to the employer that employees were working overtime

Holding that substantial evidence of an informal policy abiding or encouraging unpaid overtime could support conditional certification despite the existence of an official "time worked is time paid" policy

Upholding as consistent with due process the use of surveys and statistical analysis to measure a defendant's aggregate liability under the IWC's wage orders

Holding that such an argument "puts the cart before the horse" and "does not make sense [because i]t would essentially force plaintiffs or their attorneys to issue their own form of informal notice or to otherwise go out and solicit other plaintiffs"

Holding that, to certify a class, the court must find that "questions of law or fact common to class members predominate over any questions affecting only individual members"

Holding employers liable for “unpaid minimum wages, or their unpaid overtime compensation”

Precluding compensation for certain travel that "occur either prior to the time on any particular workday at which such employee commences, or subsequent to the time on any particular workday at which he ceases, such principal activity or activities"

Requiring employers to compensate employees for "all the time they have actually worked"

Providing examples of tasks that are compensable under the integral and indispensable test