681 F.Supp.3d 58
W.D.N.Y.2023Background
- Plaintiff Eric Freeland worked for Defendant Findlay’s Tall Timbers Distribution Center, LLC (d/b/a Ohio Logistics) in Painted Post, NY from April 2021 to April 2022 as an hourly warehouse worker.
- He was paid biweekly, received bonuses (including attendance bonuses), and frequently worked over 40 hours/week.
- Plaintiff alleges Defendant calculated overtime using a regular rate that excluded non-discretionary bonuses, and that wage statements misstated his overtime rate.
- Claims: (1) FLSA collective claim for unpaid overtime (failure to include non-discretionary bonuses in regular rate); (2) NYLL overtime claim; (3) NYLL §191(1)(a) claim for untimely (biweekly) pay for manual workers; (4) NYLL §195(3) wage-statement inaccuracies.
- Defendant moved to dismiss under Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) and to strike class claims outside plaintiff’s employment dates.
- Court: denied dismissal of FLSA/NYLL overtime claims and NYLL §191 claim; dismissed NYLL §195(3) wage-statement claim without prejudice (leave to amend); denied motion to strike class claims outside plaintiff’s employment period without prejudice.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether plaintiff plausibly alleged FLSA and NYLL overtime claim (bonuses excluded from regular rate) | Freeland says non-discretionary bonuses (e.g., attendance) were excluded from his regular rate, causing underpayment of overtime; attached paystubs show overtime hours/rates. | Defendant says pleadings are conclusory and fail to plausibly show a bonus was included or that overtime was miscalculated. | Denied dismissal: plaintiff plausibly alleged >40 hours in a week, receipt of bonuses, and paystubs support inference bonuses were excluded from regular rate. |
| Article III standing and private right of action for NYLL §191(1)(a) (untimely pay) | Freeland alleges biweekly pay deprived him of the time-value of wages and ability to invest/use funds; seeks statutory remedies under §198(1-a). | Defendant argues no concrete injury for standing; contends §191 provides no private right of action and constitutional concerns counsel against recognizing one. | Denied dismissal: lost time-value of wages is a concrete monetary injury; court follows First Dept. in Vega in finding §198(1-a) provides a private remedy for §191 violations (no persuasive authority to the contrary). |
| Whether plaintiff sufficiently alleged he was a “manual worker” under §191 | Freeland alleges >25% of duties were physical (lifting up to 50 lbs., operating machinery, breaking down parts, long standing). | Defendant claims allegations are legal conclusions or that tasks are not ‘‘physical labor.’’ | Denied dismissal: factual allegations sufficiently plead physical labor >25% of time, so §191 weekly-pay rule plausibly applies. |
| Standing for NYLL §195(3) wage-statement claim (causation/traceability) | Freeland alleges inaccurate wage statements misstated his overtime rate and prevented him from detecting underpayment. | Defendant contends mere statutory violation or missing information is insufficient; plaintiff fails to show the underpayment was fairly traceable to the inaccurate statements. | Granted dismissal without prejudice: plaintiff may have suffered underpayment, but did not plausibly plead that the underpayment was fairly traceable to §195(3) inaccuracies; leave to amend granted. |
| Standing to represent NY class beyond plaintiff’s employment dates (temporal scope) | Plaintiff seeks to represent NY hourly workers employed Feb 9, 2016–judgment, alleging common policies/practices affected all class members similarly. | Defendant says Freeland lacks standing to assert claims outside his employment window (Apr 2021–Apr 2022). | Denied without prejudice: at motion-to-dismiss stage plaintiff has alleged class standing (common injury and concerns); temporal limitations may be addressed at class certification. |
Key Cases Cited
- Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, 578 U.S. 330 (2016) (Article III concreteness requirement for statutory injuries)
- TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, 141 S. Ct. 2190 (2021) (an informational deprivation must cause concrete harm to confer standing)
- Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (1992) (three-part constitutional standing test)
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (plausibility standard for pleadings)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (application of plausibility standard)
- Lundy v. Catholic Health Sys. of Long Island Inc., 711 F.3d 106 (2d Cir. 2013) (pleading standard for FLSA overtime claims; must allege 40 hours in a week plus uncompensated time)
- Dejesus v. HF Mgmt. Servs., LLC, 726 F.3d 85 (2d Cir. 2013) (FLSA pleading requirements for overtime allegations)
- MSPA Claims 1, LLC v. Tenet Fla., Inc., 918 F.3d 1312 (11th Cir. 2019) (delay in payment—loss of time-value of money—constitutes concrete injury for standing)
- Van v. LLR, Inc., 962 F.3d 1160 (9th Cir. 2020) (time-value-of-money injury recognized for standing)
- Makarova v. United States, 201 F.3d 110 (2d Cir. 2000) (Rule 12(b)(1) standing standards)