Trinidad v. Pret A Manger (USA) Ltd., 962 F. Supp. 2d 545

Background

Plaintiff Manuel Trinidad filed a collective action under the FLSA (opt-ins now include five employees) alleging Pret A Manger NYC locations failed to pay proper overtime, required off-the-clock work, and enforced an improper tip-pool.
Plaintiffs worked as interchangeable "Team Members" (cashier/kitchen) at multiple Pret stores and submitted declarations and depositions describing unpaid overtime and tip-sharing with non-tipped staff.
Pret moved to strike four opt-in declarations as inconsistent with deposition testimony; the Court allowed depositions and supplemental briefing.
Plaintiffs moved for conditional (§ 216(b)) certification and court-facilitated notice to all non-exempt Pret Team Members in NYC. Pret opposed broad certification, the form/scope of notice, and the tip-pooling theory.
The Court denied Pret’s motion to strike, granted conditional certification limited to unpaid-overtime claims at six specific NYC stores, declined to certify on off-the-clock and tip-pooling theories, and approved mailed notice plus non-public in-store posting for a three-year period.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Motion to strike opt-in declarations	Declarations are admissible; inconsistencies are minor and go to credibility	Declarations contradict depositions and should be stricken as untimely/inconsistent	Denied — inconsistencies are mostly minor; credibility issues for later stages, not basis to strike now
Conditional certification for overtime across Pret NYC	Plaintiffs allege common policies causing unpaid overtime and seek notice to all NYC stores	Pret contests common policy and scope; argues inadequate showing that violations were uniform across locations	Grant limited conditional certification: overtime claims conditionally certified only for six specified Pret stores where plaintiffs provided sufficient factual detail
Tip-pooling claim under FLSA (relying on DOL regulation)	DOL regulation makes tips employee property regardless of tip-credit; tip-pooling with non-tipped staff unlawful even if employer pays min wage	Pret argues §203(m) conditions apply only when employer takes tip credit; DOL reg is inconsistent with statute and invalid; Pret paid minimum wage without tip credit	Denied conditional certification on tip-pooling theory — Court skeptical of DOL regulation’s consistency with §203(m) and notes plaintiffs are paid at least minimum wage without tip credit; tip claims not certified (claims preserved for now but face likely challenge)
Form, scope, and duration of notice	Plaintiffs seek notice by certified mail, posting, Excel data including phone numbers, and six-year window (to capture NYLL claims)	Pret asks for narrower class (three-year window), first-class mail only, no phone numbers, and limit to NYC employees	Approved: notice to non-exempt employees at the six stores for three years prior to complaint; first-class mail and non-public in-store posting allowed; Pret to produce employee data (except phone numbers) within 10 days

Key Cases Cited

Myers v. Hertz Corp., 624 F.3d 537 (2d Cir.) (framework for two-step FLSA conditional certification)
Hoffmann-La Roche Inc. v. Sperling, 493 U.S. 165 (U.S.) (courts may facilitate notice to potential opt-in plaintiffs)
Lundy v. Catholic Health Sys. of Long Island Inc., 711 F.3d 106 (2d Cir.) (pleading standard for plausible FLSA overtime claim requires alleging a workweek over 40 hours and uncompensated overtime)
Nakahata v. New York-Presbyterian Healthcare Sys., 723 F.3d 192 (2d Cir.) (details required to plead plausible overtime claims)
Cumbie v. Woody Woo, Inc., 596 F.3d 577 (9th Cir.) (statutory reading that §203(m) conditions apply only when employer takes tip credit)
Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (U.S.) (framework for judicial review of agency interpretations)
Williams v. Jacksonville Terminal Co., 315 U.S. 386 (U.S.) (background on tipping customs and ownership of tips)