Greenstein v. Meredith Corp., 948 F. Supp. 2d 1266

Plaintiff Melissa Greenstein sues under the FLSA and Kansas Wage Payment Act for unpaid straight-time and overtime compensation as a news producer for Meredith Corporation’s Kansas City station.
Defendant Meredith operates 12 television stations nationwide and does not oppose conditional certification for Kansas City news producers, but objects to a broader class classifying all producers or across all stations.
Plaintiff moves for conditional certification under 29 U.S.C. § 216(b) to allow opt-in of similarly situated former and current producers who were classified as exempt.
The motion seeks class certification, designation of Greenstein as class representative, approval of plaintiffs’ counsel, and a proposed notice and distribution plan, plus sharing of employee information between sides.
The court applies a lenient standard for conditional certification, not weighing evidence or resolving merits, and evaluates whether the complaint alleges a common policy or plan.
The court ultimately grants conditional certification for the proposed class and designates Greenstein as class representative, while denying certain aspects of the notice plan but allowing the parties to confer and attempt to agree on a notice form.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the putative class is sufficiently similarly situated under §216(b).	Greenstein argues a common policy misclassifying producers as exempt.	Meredith contends the class is too broad and varies by station/job.	Yes; court finds substantial allegations of a common policy/plan justifying conditional certification.
Whether to certify a broader class beyond Kansas City news producers.	Class should include all producers nationwide with similar duties.	Differences across stations warrant a narrower scope.	Court grants conditional certification for the broader class as proposed, with discretion for later narrowing at the merits stage.
Objections to proposed notice and distribution procedures.	Notice should be distributed broadly with necessary contact information.	Some proposed methods (posting at workplace, paystub notices) and data requests are inappropriate.	Court partially sustains objections; directs efforts to craft a jointly proposed notice and consent form and limits some distribution methods.

Thiessen v. General Electric Capital Corp., 267 F.3d 1095 (10th Cir. 2001) (establishes the lenient standard for conditional certification under §216(b))
Gieseke v. First Horizon Home Loan Corp., 408 F.Supp.2d 1164 (D. Kan. 2006) (supports evaluating common policy at the initial stage without merits adjudication)