Martin v. United States
130 Fed. Cl. 578
| Fed. Cl. | 2017Background
- During the October 1–16, 2013 federal shutdown, certain "excepted" federal employees continued to work (Oct. 1–5) but were not paid on their regularly scheduled paydays; they were paid retroactively after the shutdown.
- Plaintiffs are non-exempt FLSA employees who worked during that first shutdown week and were certified as a class (≈24,000+ members).
- Plaintiffs sued under the FLSA for failure to pay minimum and overtime wages on the regularly scheduled payday; the court previously sustained the legal sufficiency of those claims.
- The government defended that the Anti‑Deficiency Act (ADA) barred timely payment in the absence of appropriations and thus excused or limited liability.
- The FLSA provides for liquidated damages equal to unpaid wages unless the employer shows subjective good faith and objectively reasonable grounds for believing its conduct complied with the FLSA.
- Parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment; the court ruled plaintiffs’ motion granted and defendant’s denied, instructing parties to calculate damages.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether failure to pay on regularly scheduled payday violated the FLSA | FLSA requires payment on next regularly scheduled payday; failure to do so violates the Act | ADA barred agencies from making payments absent appropriations, so timely payment was impossible | Court: Failure to pay timely violated the FLSA (undisputed fact that payments were not timely) |
| Whether the ADA eliminates or cancels FLSA obligations | Plaintiffs: ADA does not cancel statutory rights; government remains liable and ADA is relevant only to good‑faith defense | Government: ADA and criminal prohibitions made timely payment impossible, so it should avoid liability | Court: ADA does not cancel FLSA obligations; ADA considered only as part of the good‑faith inquiry, not as a categorical defense |
| Availability of liquidated‑damages exemption (good faith & reasonable grounds) | Plaintiffs: Government did not take steps to ascertain FLSA obligations and cannot meet good‑faith burden | Government: Officials reasonably believed they could not comply with both ADA and FLSA and did not seek legal advice because compliance was impossible | Court: Government failed the subjective good‑faith prong (made no meaningful inquiry); therefore cannot avoid liquidated damages |
| Applicability of DOL interpretive exception for late overtime payment (29 C.F.R. §778.106) | Plaintiffs: Exception inapplicable here; many agencies had staff to compute pay; budget impasse not the type of uncontrollable event the bulletin contemplates | Government: Shutdown was an event beyond its control preventing timely computation/payment for some agencies, so bulletin should excuse liquidated damages for overtime | Court: Exception does not apply to the vast majority of class (agencies had personnel to compute pay); for the few affected employees, the exception is unavailable here (budget impasse not analogous to natural disasters) |
Key Cases Cited
- Brooklyn Sav. Bank v. O’Neil, 324 U.S. 697 (employer must pay wages on regularly scheduled payday)
- Biggs v. Wilson, 1 F.3d 1537 (9th Cir.) (delay in paying overtime during budget impasse violated FLSA)
- Salazar v. Ramah Navajo Chapter, 132 S. Ct. 2181 (ADA limits government agents but does not extinguish statutory rights of claimants)
- Ford Motor Co. v. United States, 378 F.3d 1314 (Fed. Cir.) (ADA does not bar recovery of costs arising from government performance)