Sixth Circuit Refuses To Apply Stricter FLSA Collective Action Certification Standard

In concluding that the proper standard for certifying Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) collective actions is whether the plaintiffs are "similarly situated," the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ruled on March 2, 2016, that the Seventh Circuit's application of the stricter Federal Rule 23 class action standard to an FLSA collective action was inappropriate. According to the Sixth Circuit in Monroe v. FTS USA, LLC and UniTek USA, LLC, Congress did not import the Rule 23 predominance requirement into the FLSA, and doing so "would undermine the remedial purpose of FLSA collective actions."

Background

The plaintiffs in Monroe were all "similarly situated" cable technicians, installing cable for FTS and its cable company clients. They shared similar job duties and were subject to the same compensation plan and company-wide timekeeping system. Plaintiffs sought to bring an FLSA collective action for alleged unpaid overtime compensation that stemmed from the timekeeping system.

The district court authorized notice and granted conditional certification of the technician's FLSA collective action. The notice defined the class as any and all technicians employed at any location across the country who were compensated on a piece-rate basis who did not receive overtime compensation for hours worked over 40 per week for the past three years. A total of 293 technicians opted in to the collective action.

After discovery, the district court denied the company's motion to decertify the class and for summary judgment, finding that the class members were similarly situated. At trial, a representative number of the technicians were called as witnesses to establish the plaintiffs' case and the jury returned a verdict on behalf of the entire collective opt-in class.

The Court of Appeals' Decision

The company appealed the verdict arguing, among other things, that the technicians should not have been certified as a class under 29 U.S.C. § 216(b). The Sixth Circuit affirmed the district court's class certification, relying upon O'Brien v. Ed Donnelly Enterprises, Inc., 575 F.3d 567 (6th Cir. 2009). There, as here, the Sixth Circuit concluded that an overly restrictive application of the FLSA's "similarly situated" standard is not warranted, as Congress passed the FLSA with "broad remedial intent" to address "unfair method[s] of competition in commerce" inconsistent with the standard of living necessary for "health, efficiency, and general well-being of...