12 F. Supp. 3d 918
W.D. Tex.2014Background
- Plaintiffs are landscape laborers for Milberger Landscaping who met at the company yard, loaded trucks, rode in company trucks to job sites, and returned to the yard to perform additional tasks (unloading, dumping refuse, fueling, cleaning, reloading).
- Plaintiffs were paid for morning travel to the first job site but not paid for afternoon travel back to the yard.
- Plaintiffs brought a collective action under the FLSA for unpaid overtime tied to: morning yard work, morning travel, afternoon travel, and post-return yard work.
- Milberger conceded employees performed post-return work but contended travel time is noncompensable and that paying morning travel was merely generous; it recorded some time as "code 1313."
- Disputed factual issues remain about whether Milberger willfully violated the FLSA and whether its time records are accurate; parties cross-moved for summary judgment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Are afternoon trips from last job site back to yard compensable? | Travel back is integral/indispensable because employees performed work upon return and carried/loaded tools; compensable under Portal-to-Portal continuous-workday rule. | Travel is noncompensable commuting; employer treated morning travel as a courtesy. | Held: Afternoon travel is compensable as a matter of law. |
| Was defendant's violation willful (extends limitations to 3 years)? | Milberger acted in reckless disregard (failed to consult counsel; knew or should have known). | No showing of knowledge or reckless disregard; mere failure to consult counsel insufficient. | Held: Material fact dispute; plaintiff's motion denied on willfulness. |
| Are employer time records sufficiently accurate to preclude burden-shifting (Anderson)? | Employer records for afternoon travel are inadequate; burden-shifting to employer is warranted. | Employer can reconstruct travel from distances and foremen time sheets; records are adequate. | Held: Fact issues exist; plaintiffs' motion on record insufficiency denied. |
| Did plaintiffs present "definite and certain evidence" of uncompensated hours (mornings/afternoons)? | Plaintiffs show underreporting of "1313" time and testimony that waiting time was unpaid; sufficient for reasonable inference. | Plaintiffs failed to prove hours with the required definite and certain evidence; records show time was recorded. | Held: Material fact questions prevent summary judgment for either side on these hours. |
Key Cases Cited
- IBP, Inc. v. Alvarez, 546 U.S. 21 (Supreme Court) (discusses Portal-to-Portal Act and continuous-workday rule)
- Vega v. Gasper, 36 F.3d 417 (5th Cir.) (analyzes when travel to fields is compensable)
- Anderson v. Mt. Clemens Pottery Co., 328 U.S. 680 (Supreme Court) (burden-shifting when employer records are inadequate)
- McLaughlin v. Richland Shoe Co., 486 U.S. 128 (Supreme Court) (defines willfulness standard under FLSA)
- Reeves v. Int’l Telephone & Telegraph Corp., 616 F.2d 1342 (5th Cir.) (plaintiff's burden for proving unpaid work with definite and certain evidence)
- Griffin v. S & B Engineers & Constructors, Ltd., [citation="507 F. App'x 377"] (5th Cir.) (applies continuous-workday analysis to travel and pre/post activities)
- Von Friewalde v. Boeing Aerospace Ops., Inc., [citation="339 F. App'x 448"] (5th Cir.) (applies Anderson burden-shifting where records are incomplete)