833 F.3d 440
4th Cir.2016Background
- Walbridge obtained a federal construction contract for a Navy facility and subcontracted electrical work to Power Design, which in turn hired subcontractors (RDZ, ES & R) who employed the named Electrical Workers.
- The subcontract (NEX Contract) incorporated the Davis-Bacon Act (DBA) and the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act (CWHSSA); it did not explicitly incorporate the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).
- The Electrical Workers sued Power Design under the FLSA for unpaid minimum and overtime wages and liquidated damages, alleging unpaid pre-shift time and unpaid overtime.
- Power Design moved for summary judgment, arguing DBA/CWHSSA governed and precluded an FLSA private claim; the district court granted summary judgment for Power Design.
- The Fourth Circuit vacated and remanded, holding the FLSA can apply concurrently with the DBA and CWHSSA and that factual issues (e.g., prevailing-rate vs. paid-rate calculations, classifications) remain for the district court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether employees on DBA/CWHSSA-covered subcontract work may bring FLSA claims | FLSA applies broadly; workers may sue for unpaid wages/overtime despite DBA/CWHSSA coverage | DBA/CWHSSA govern subcontract; because they lack private right of action, FLSA claims are precluded | FLSA may apply concurrently; district court erred to bar FLSA claims |
| Whether the absence of a private right under DBA/CWHSSA conflicts with FLSA's private right | Lack of DBA/CWHSSA private right does not preclude FLSA remedies | Concurrent schemes are incompatible because enforcement differs | No conflict; difference in remedies is not dispositive |
| Proper overtime-rate calculation (paid cash rate v. prevailing DBA rate) | Seek overtime based on hours worked; alternatively DB A prevailing rate would be appropriate | Overtime must be calculated using DBA-prescribed basic hourly rate and exclude fringe benefits per DOL regs | No statutory conflict; DBA’s basic hourly rate can govern FLSA overtime; calculational disputes are factual and for district court |
| Whether factual disputes (classifications, actual rates paid, fringe characterization) preclude summary judgment | There are payroll records and affidavits showing some were paid below prevailing rates; classification disputes exist | Argues classification and rate variances create unresolved facts | Remanded — factual issues (classification, whether cash payments were wages or fringes, correct rate) remain to be resolved by district court |
Key Cases Cited
- Powell v. U.S. Cartridge Co., 339 U.S. 497 (Sup. Ct.) (FLSA and other federal labor statutes can apply concurrently; absence of mutual exclusivity defeats preclusion)
- Masters v. Maryland Mgmt. Co., 493 F.2d 1329 (4th Cir.) (CWHSSA and FLSA may both apply and use compatible overtime computations)
- Grochowski v. Phoenix Constr., 318 F.3d 80 (2d Cir.) (addressed FLSA overtime computation on a DBA-covered contract; held overtime limited to 1.5x hourly rates actually paid)
- Univs. Research Ass’n v. Coutu, 450 U.S. 754 (Sup. Ct.) (DBA does not clearly confer an implied private right of action; discussed overlap with other remedies)