Brubach v. City of Albuquerque
893 F. Supp. 2d 1216
D.N.M.2012Background
- Defendant City of Albuquerque employed security guards as non-exempt FLSA employees earning at least $12/hour.
- Plaintiffs allege unpaid overtime for five-minute pre-shift briefing and other wage issues, plus NM state wage claims.
- SOP required arrival five minutes early for briefing; SOP was eliminated Sept. 1, 2011, but dispute exists whether it was mandatory.
- Plaintiffs claim supervisors enforced the five-minute early arrival; City contends SOP not mandatory and officers weren’t disciplined for early arrival.
- Plaintiffs did not uniformly record pre-shift time; several witnesses testified about expectations to arrive early and occasional lack of pay for that time.
- Court proceedings include cross-motions for summary judgment on FLSA compensability, offsets for meal breaks, de minimis defense, statute of limitations/liquidated damages, and NM wage claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the five-minute pre-shift briefing period is compensable under the FLSA. | Plaintiffs were required to arrive five minutes early and were effectively employed for this time. | The pre-shift time was not mandatory or compensable as work. | Factual disputes preclude summary judgment on compensability; after Sept. 1, 2011, no liability for early arrival. |
| Whether an offset for bona fide meal periods precludes FLSA liability. | Meal breaks were not bona fide if employees were not relieved from duties. | Paid meal periods offset unpaid pre-shift work. | Offset defense denied; genuine issues remain about bona fide meal periods. |
| Whether the pre-shift briefing time is de minimis and excludable. | Five minutes daily is non-de minimis work time. | De minimis time may apply to insubstantial work. | De minimis defense denied; five-minute briefing is not beyond scheduled hours as a fixed period. |
| Whether the three-year statute of limitations and liquidated damages apply. | Willful FLSA violation supports a three-year period and liquidated damages. | Good faith and uncertain liability preclude extended limitations and liquidated damages. | No ruling on limitations/liquidated damages at this stage due to ongoing liability questions. |
| Whether NM Act overtime applies to public employers like the City. | NM Act overtime provisions should apply to City. | NM Act overtime does not apply to public employers. | NM Act overtime claims are denied; NM law not applicable to this public employer. |
Key Cases Cited
- Armour & Co. v. Wantock, 323 U.S. 126 (Supreme Court 1944) (work may include non-physical exertion if integral to principal activity)
- Anderson v. Mt. Clemens Pottery Co., 328 U.S. 680 (U.S. 1946) (de minimis time may be disregarded if insubstantial beyond scheduled hours)
- Lamon v. City of Shawnee, 972 F.2d 1145 (10th Cir. 1992) (pre-shift time may be compensable if required or pressure to report early exists)
- Lindow v. United States, 738 F.2d 1057 (9th Cir. 1984) (employer suffer or permit to work; four-factor context for de minimis)
- Beasley v. Hillcrest Med. Ctr., 78 F. App’x 70 (10th Cir. 2003) (bona fide meal period evaluation; not strictly required here)
- McLaughlin v. Richland Shoe Co., 486 U.S. 128 (Supreme Court 1988) (willfulness standard for three-year limitations)
- Whitaker v. Pacific Enters. Oil Co., No. 91-5092, 1992 WL 44729 (10th Cir. 1992) (knowledge element for overtime work)