3 F.4th 1084
8th Cir.2021Background
- Plaintiffs Linda Rapp and Craig and Karen Shumway are direct support professionals employed by Network of Community Options, Inc. (NCO); each cared for an NCO client who lived in the employee's home.
- Rapp alleged she was effectively on duty 24/7 and sought 98 hours of weekly overtime (24×7 minus scheduled NCO hours, 2 hours/day paid work for a different employer, and 16 hours personal time).
- Craig and Karen each claimed 28 hours of weekly overtime (24×7 minus 112 plan-of-care hours, divided between them).
- The record lacked contemporaneous, specific time records: Rapp offered no detailed hour-by-hour evidence; the Shumways produced only one week of time entries and counsel-created spreadsheets not based on original records.
- The district court granted summary judgment for NCO, concluding plaintiffs failed to show compensable overtime or that NCO had actual/constructive knowledge; because of that disposition the court did not decide statute-of-limitations or liquidated-damages questions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether plaintiffs performed compensable overtime beyond 40 hrs/week | Plaintiffs: lived with clients and were "on duty" nearly 24/7, so worked unpaid overtime (Rapp: 98 hrs; Shumways: 28 hrs each) | NCO: plaintiffs failed to identify specific hours or contemporaneous records showing work beyond scheduled hours | Court: Plaintiffs failed to produce evidence of specific compensable overtime; summary judgment for NCO |
| Whether NCO had actual or constructive knowledge of alleged overtime | Plaintiffs: employer knew employees lived with clients and expected assistance at night; prior discussions about additional hours show awareness | NCO: absence of notice of actual ongoing overtime; prior budget/plan conversations concerned future hours only | Court: Plaintiffs did not show actual or constructive knowledge; communications were insufficient to put NCO on notice of ongoing overtime |
| Entitlement to 3-year willful statute of limitations and liquidated damages | Plaintiffs: alleged willful FLSA violations would trigger 3‑year limitations and liquidated damages | NCO: argued claims fail on the merits so enhanced relief not warranted | Court: Did not reach these issues because plaintiffs failed to establish compensable overtime or employer knowledge |
Key Cases Cited
- Holaway v. Stratasys, Inc., 771 F.3d 1057 (8th Cir. 2014) (FLSA summary‑judgment framework; requirement to identify specific weeks/hours worked)
- Hertz v. Woodbury Cnty., 566 F.3d 775 (8th Cir. 2009) (plaintiff must prove compensable work and unpaid hours; employer must have actual or constructive knowledge)
- Mumbower v. Callicott, 526 F.2d 1183 (8th Cir. 1975) (employee compensated if employer knows or has reason to believe employee continues to work and duties are integral to principal activity)
- Cent. Mo. Tel. Co. v. Conwell, 170 F.2d 641 (8th Cir. 1948) (factors for determining whether on‑duty waiting/sleeping time is working time)
- Armour & Co. v. Wantock, 323 U.S. 126 (U.S. 1944) (distinguishing active duties from merely waiting for something to happen)