Neor v. Acacia Network, Inc.
1:22-cv-04814
S.D.N.Y.Mar 31, 2025Background
- Plaintiffs, former employees of Acacia Network and its affiliates, claim violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and New York Labor Law (NYLL) based on unpaid wages and overtime, improper time-shaving, and automatic deductions from hours worked.
- Plaintiffs allege they were routinely required to work during unpaid lunch breaks and after scheduled shifts across several Acacia locations and job positions, without appropriate compensation.
- Plaintiffs seek conditional certification of a statewide FLSA collective action for all hourly, non-exempt employees employed in the last six years.
- The court considered whether Acacia and its related entities function as a single integrated enterprise for FLSA liability purposes.
- The central dispute is whether the employees are "similarly situated" and subject to common allegedly unlawful compensation policies and practices, justifying collective action.
- Defendants oppose certification, arguing the absence of uniform policies/practices and contesting the breadth of the proposed collective.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Single Integrated Enterprise | Acacia/affiliates are centrally managed, unified policies | Entities have varied practices, not a single employer | Plaintiffs plausibly allege single integrated enterprise |
| Similarly Situated for Collective Action | Policies applied to all non-exempt staff at all locations | No uniform policies; individualized facts vary by location/role | Sufficient showing for conditional certification |
| Breadth of Class (positions/locations) | All non-exempt staff affected regardless of job/location | Too broad; different jobs, work, locations, supervision | Certifies all NY locations for hourly employees |
| Statute of Limitations & Notice | Seek 6-year period and equitable tolling due to delay | Only 2–3 years, opposes tolling | 3-year period with equitable tolling granted |
Key Cases Cited
- Myers v. Hertz Corp., 624 F.3d 537 (2d Cir. 2010) (establishes two-stage framework for FLSA collective certification)
- Barfield v. N.Y.C. Health & Hospitals Corp., 537 F.3d 132 (2d Cir. 2008) (sets out single integrated enterprise test)
- Juarez v. 449 Restaurant, Inc., 29 F. Supp. 3d 363 (S.D.N.Y. 2014) (discusses factors for integrated enterprise)
- Scott v. Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc., 954 F.3d 502 (2d Cir. 2020) (defines "similarly situated" standard under FLSA)
- Winfield v. Citibank, N.A., 843 F. Supp. 2d 397 (S.D.N.Y. 2012) (conditional certification does not require proof of formal policy)