Skip to main content

Evidence of Unpaid Overtime and Refusal of Supervisors to Sign Overtime Approval Forms Ultimately Dooms Employer's Summary Judgment


Williams v. The Bethel Springvale Nursing Home - United States District Court, Southern District of New York


Facts:  Nicola Williams ("Williams") was employed by the Bethel Springvale Nursing Home ("Bethvale")  as a nurse.  Williams filed a collective action against Bethvale on the grounds that she (and other nurses) were subjected to working conditions in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA").  Specifically, Williams alleged that she (and other nurses) were required to work overtime or through lunch breaks without being paid for the time worked.  Bethel apparently required all nurses that worked overtime to have overtime approval forms signed at the end of the given pay period.  However, supervisors at Bethel allegedly refused to sign the forms even when the nurses worked beyond their scheduled shifts and through meal breaks.

Bethel subsequently moved for summary judgment.

Holding:  In the case of motions for summary judgment, a court can grant the motion if the movant (in this case Bethel) shows there is no genuine issue of material fact.  Accordingly, Bethel bears the burden to establish, based upon evidence in the record, that no genuine issue of material fact exists.  Bethel could also prevail upon its motion if it established that Williams could not produce admissible evidence to support the existence of a material fact.

Based upon the evidence in the record, the Court held that sufficient evidence existed to establish a genuine issue of material fact as to the overtime and missed meal breaks claim brought by Williams.  In the pleadings, Williams had established that she (and other nurses) routinely worked beyond 40 hours in a week.   In particular, Williams had plead that Bethel instructed her (and other nurses) to clock out and go back to finish up work.  As well, it had been established that supervisors at Bethel had a "routine" of not signing the overtime slips produced by Williams (and other nurses). 

Judgment:  The District Court denied Bethel's motion for summary judgment as to the FLSA claims brought by Williams on the grounds that sufficient evidence had been plead to establish that Williams (and other nurses) routinely worked more than 40 hours a week or were "forced" to clock out and keep working, without being paid overtime or for the total time worked.

The Takeaway:  As always, just because a judge denies a motion for summary judgment, that does not necessarily shed light on how the case will ultimately be decided.  In this case, as with many, the Court found that sufficient evidence had been plead to establish the existence of a genuine issue of material fact such that a jury would hear the matter.  Based upon the facts plead and the Court's concise analysis, I think they got it right in this instance:  there was evidence that Williams (and other nurses) often worked more than 40 hours a week but were not paid overtime, were required to clock out but return to work without recording their hours worked, and supervisors at Bethel refused to sign overtime approval forms.  In light of this evidence in the record, there were sufficient grounds for the Court to deny Bethel's motion for summary judgment and allow the case to proceed to a jury.

Majority Opinion Judge:  Judge Roman

Date:  September 12, 2017

Opinion:  http://hr.cch.com/eld/WilliamsBethel091217.pdf

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NLRB: Discussion Among Employees About Tip Pooling is Protected Concerted Activity

  This Advice Memorandum from the National Labor Relations Board’s Associate General Counsel, Jayme Sophir, addressed whether employees which discussed and complained about tip pooling at work constituted protected concerted activity. In relevant part, an employer in New York operated a chain of steakhouses.  While tip pooling was in place at these steakhouses, some of the employees objected to it on the grounds that it was not transparent and improperly divided tips among the workers.  Employees were told not to complain or talk to each other about the tip pool and were told that doing so would endanger their jobs.  Despite the employer later attempting to provide some clarity as to how the tips were being divided, rancor still existed among some employees.  At one point, the employees were told by a general manager that some employees that had been talking about the tip pool were “cleared out” and the employer would continue to do so. In the Advice Memorandum,...
Post a Comment
Read more

San Diego Rolls Back Vaccine Mandate For City Workers

Last Tuesday, the San Diego City Council voted to do away with the vaccine mandate for city employees. The city’s vaccine mandate that was in place required city workers to get the coronavirus vaccine or risk termination.  Perhaps to this surprise of no one, the city’s policy came under fire with 14 employees being terminated and over 100 other employees resigning.  With the coronavirus subsiding, including in Southern California, the San Diego City Council took action. Now, bear in mind, the repeal of the vaccine mandate does not take place immediately. With that being said, the mandate will be repealed March 8th.  I suppose the question now is, what other cities or regions follow San Diego’s lead? For additional information:   https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/politics/story/2023-01-24/san-diego-repeals-controversial-covid-19-vaccine-mandate-citing-drop-in-cases-hospitalizations
Post a Comment
Read more

NLRB: Former Employee Cannot Be Barred From Work Premises After Filing Wage Suit

MEI-GSR Holdings, LLC - NLRB Facts :  MEI-GSR Holdings, LLC d/b/a Grand Sierra Resort & Casino ("GSR") operated a facility that included a hotel, casino, restaurant, clubs, bars, and a pool which were all open to the general public.  Tiffany Sargent ("Sargent") was briefly employed by GSR as a "beverage supervisor" in December of 2012.  After her employment ended, Sargent continued to socialize at one of the clubs.  GSR had a long standing practice of allowing former employees to patronize its facility and did not prohibit Sargent from doing so.  In June of 2013, Sargent and another employee filed a class and collective action against GSR for alleged unpaid wages, in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and Nevada law.  In July of 2014, GSR denied Sargent access to an event at one of the clubs.  GSR followed up with a letter and stated that with the on-going litigation (from the wage suit), it decided to bar Sargent from the premises. ...
1 comment
Read more