306 F.R.D. 268
N.D. Cal.2015Background
- Plaintiffs Tara Shaia and Eric Parker are Executive Chefs at senior-living communities operated by Harvest Management Sub LLC (doing business as Holiday); they allege Holiday misclassified Executive Chefs as exempt and failed to pay overtime in violation of the FLSA.
- Holiday operates ~300 communities nationwide and reclassified California Executive Chefs as non-exempt on May 2, 2014; plaintiffs seek a nationwide collective for Executive Chefs for the prior three years.
- Holiday implemented an arbitration program (with class/representative-action waivers) in 2013 and later mailed settlement releases to many California Executive Chefs; Holiday says a majority of putative collective members are bound by arbitration or have settled.
- Plaintiffs moved for conditional certification under the FLSA §216(b) and sought contact information to disseminate court-approved notice; plaintiffs submitted declarations and job descriptions as evidentiary support.
- Holiday opposed, arguing plaintiffs’ evidence was inadmissible/hearsay, duties vary by location, FLSA exemption analysis is individualized, and many potential opt-ins are barred by arbitration/releases.
- The court granted conditional certification under the lenient ‘‘notice-stage’’ standard, finding the submitted (though thin) evidence sufficient for conditional certification; ordered parties to meet-and-confer on a neutral notice and set production deadlines for names and mailing addresses.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether proposed collective is "similarly situated" for conditional certification | Executive Chefs nationwide share common duties, uniform policies, and were uniformly classified as exempt; submitted declarations and job descriptions show commonality | Evidence is hearsay/unauthenticated; duties and exemptions require individualized fact-intensive inquiry; plaintiffs’ showing is speculative | Granted conditional certification under the lenient notice-stage standard; plaintiffs’ evidence adequate at this stage |
| Scope of notice (nationwide vs. limited) | Seek nationwide notice to all Executive Chefs employed within three years | Holiday says California reclassification and arbitration/settlements preclude nationwide notice and many members | Court certified collective nationwide for notice purposes; disputes about arbitration/settlements reserved for later; notice may state parties disagree on eligibility |
| Evidentiary standard at notice stage | Declarations and job descriptions suffice given limited discovery | Only admissible evidence should be considered; hearsay should be excluded | Court applied relaxed evidentiary rules at notice stage and considered the declarations and job descriptions sufficient |
| What contact information must be produced and notice mechanics | Request names, addresses, emails, phones, SSNs; propose mailing, email, and workplace posting | Object to broad disclosure; many recipients may be ineligible due to arbitration/releases | Court ordered production of names and mailing addresses only; declined to require emails or SSNs or posting; directed parties to confer on neutral notice form and opt-in period |
Key Cases Cited
- Hoffmann-La Roche, Inc. v. Sperling, 493 U.S. 165 (court must avoid appearing to endorse merits when authorizing notice)
- Does I thru XXIII v. Advanced Textile Corp., 214 F.3d 1058 (FLSA §216(b) collective action framework)
- Lewis v. Wells Fargo & Co., 669 F. Supp. 2d 1124 (describing two-step collective-certification approach)
- Dominguez v. Schwarzenegger, 270 F.R.D. 477 (evidentiary rules relaxed at notice/conditional-certification stage)