Dees v. FEVID Transport, LLC, 1:24-cv-00873

Plaintiffs (former truck drivers) filed suit against FEVID Transport, LLC and Sand Revolution II, LLC alleging violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and New Mexico Minimum Wage Act for unpaid overtime.
The court conditionally certified an FLSA collective action for truck drivers who worked in New Mexico, worked overtime, and were not paid proper overtime wages.
The dispute arose over the content and form of proposed notice and consent forms to be sent to potential collective members, as required for FLSA opt-in cases.
Defendants objected to various aspects of the proposed notice and consent forms, prompting the court to review and rule on each objection.
The court reviewed the parties' submissions, including redlined versions of the forms, and made its own alterations where necessary before authorizing the final notice.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Reference to "gap time" pay	Notice should mention claim for unpaid gap time pay.	Claim for gap time not pleaded or certified; should be omitted.	Sustained Defendants' objection; omitted.
Stating notice is "Court Approved/Authorized"	Such language is neutral, clarifies notice is not advertising.	Implies court endorsement of case's merits.	Overruled; language allowed with clarifications.
Warning of possible responsibility for costs	Notice shouldn't say opt-ins may owe costs if plaintiffs lose.	Notice should warn opt-ins they may be responsible for costs.	Overruled; language not required, but "won't pay anything" omitted.
Length of opt-in period (90 vs. 60 days)	Ninety-day opt-in is fair and reasonable.	Sixty days is sufficient.	Overruled; ninety-day period allowed.
Attorney fee disclosure level	General statement about contingency fee is sufficient.	Notices should state the percentage and how fees are deducted.	Overruled; general statement sufficient; further written disclosure ordered.
Referring to potential future separate suits	Language allows counsel to refile related wage claims if needed.	Improper to include re-filing authority in opt-in consent.	Overruled; such provision not improper here.
Court approval of email/reminder notice text	Notices should follow approved form.	All email/reminder text should be court-approved.	Sustained; text must match court-approved notice.

Hoffmann-La Roche Inc. v. Sperling, 493 U.S. 165 (Courts must ensure FLSA notices are neutral, accurate, and do not imply endorsement of the case).
Fasanelli v. Heartland Brewery, Inc., 516 F. Supp. 2d 317 (Notice must fairly inform opt-in plaintiffs about key facts, including attorney fee arrangements).
Gieseke v. First Horizon Home Loan Corp., Civil Action No. 04-2511-CM (No pin citation; not included as per instructions)