Driver v. AppleIllinois, LLC
2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2542
| N.D. Ill. | 2013Background
- Plaintiffs are present or former tipped employees asserting IMWL, IWPCA, and FLSA claims for tip-credit notice deficiencies.
- A class was certified on IMWL notice regarding tip credit; named plaintiffs pursue individual FLSA claims for notice under 203(m).
- AppleIllinois posted IDOL-approved IMWL posters; issue is whether more information beyond the poster is required to satisfy notice.
- IMWL requires posting a Director-approved poster and informing employees of pay rate; FLSA § 203(m) requires informing employees of tip-credit provisions.
- The posters used disclose rate of pay and tip credit but do not detail all 203(m) provisions such as tips retention and pooling.
- Plaintiffs claim posters, a Voluntary Tip-Sharing Agreement, and oral notices are insufficient to inform about the tip credit; AppleIllinois seeks summary judgment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| IMWL notice sufficiency for tip credit | IMWL incorporates 203(m) notice requirements, so poster alone is insufficient. | IMWL only requires posting and rate of pay; no extra notice is mandated by IMWL. | Granted for IMWL notice; class cannot pursue additional notice beyond poster. |
| Named plaintiffs' FLSA notice sufficiency | Posters, tip-sharing agreement, and oral notices do not adequately inform § 203(m) provisions. | Any of those methods can independently inform employees about tip credit. | Denied for named plaintiffs; summary judgment on FLSA notice is not warranted. |
| Retroactivity and applicability of 29 C.F.R. § 531.59(b) | We need to apply the regulation’s requirements to inform employees. | Regulation should be treated as clarifying; minimal § 203(m) notice standard remains. | Not necessary to decide retroactivity; however, AppleIllinois did not meet minimal § 203(m) requirements. |
Key Cases Cited
- Reich v. Chez Robert, Inc., 28 F.3d 401 (3d Cir.1994) (employer liable for full minimum wage when tip-credit provisions violated)
- Martin v. Tango’s Rest., Inc., 969 F.2d 1319 (1st Cir.1992) (notice to inform about tipping as credit required; reflects tip-credit obligations)
- Kilgore v. Outback Steakhouse of Fla., Inc., 160 F.3d 294 (6th Cir.1998) (some circuits require more explicit notice; informs § 203(m) requirements)
- Carter v. Tennant Co., 383 F.3d 673 (7th Cir.2004) (statutory interpretation guiding plain-language approach)
- Haynes v. Tru-Green Corp., 507 N.E.2d 945 (Ill. App. 4th Dist.1987) (state-law analysis mirroring federal wage-law considerations)
- Lewis v. Giordano’s Enters., 921 N.E.2d 740 (Ill. App. 1st Dist.2009) (Illinois law parallels FLSA; use federal guidance when lacking local precedent)
- Schmidt v. Smith & Wollensky, LLC, 268 F.R.D. 323 (N.D. Ill.2010) (district court addressing importation of FLSA concepts into IMWL)
- Holly v. Montes, 231 Ill.2d 153 (2008) (statutory interpretation principles within Illinois law)
- Turner v. Millennium Park Joint Venture, LLC, 767 F.Supp.2d 951 (N.D. Ill.2011) (examines importing FLSA concepts into IMWL; textual limits noted)