Abshire v. Redland Energy Services, LLC, 822 F. Supp. 2d 874

Plaintiffs are hourly Redland employees on oil drilling rigs, alleging FLSA wage and hour violations.
Before June 2009, employees worked 12-hour shifts Tue–Mon, seven days a week, with 84 hours per week and 44 overtime hours.
In June 2009, Redland changed the payroll period to Sunday–Saturday but kept the Tue–Mon shift schedule.
Plaintiffs claim the payroll change was a device to reduce overtime and violate the FLSA.
DOL conducted an onsite investigation in Jan 2011 and found no FLSA violations, including no overtime evasion, though Plaintiffs were not interviewed.
The court granted Redland’s motion for summary judgment, dismissing the case with prejudice.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether pay period change violated the FLSA	Abshire et al. argue the change evaded overtime payments.	Redland claims a legitimate business purpose to standardize payroll; not an evasion.	No genuine dispute; policy had legitimate business purpose.
Whether the change was a subterfuge to avoid overtime	Change was designed to reduce overtime specifically for rig workers.	Change applied universally for administrative efficiency; not a subterfuge.	Not supported; no evidence of evasion tied to policy.
Whether DOL findings support summary judgment	DOL investigation could indicate FLSA violation and warrant trial.	DOL findings are persuasive but not controlling; investigation showed no violation.	DOL findings weigh in favor of judgment for Redland.

Seymore v. Metson Marine, Inc., 194 Cal.App.4th 361 (Cal.Ct.App.2011) (employer cannot evade overtime with biased workweek design)