Walker v. HongHua America, LLC
2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 63910
S.D. Tex.2012Background
- Plaintiffs sue HongHua America, LLC for FLSA overtime violations and misclassification as independent contractors.
- Plaintiffs allege two employee categories—Crane Operators and Roughneck/Riggers—were systematically misclassified to avoid overtime pay.
- Class period sought: May 7, 2009 through January 12, 2012, with a willful violation posture asserted.
- Plaintiffs move to conditionally certify a collective under §216(b) and permit notice to similarly situated workers; Defendant objects to certification as to worker status and scope.
- Court grants in part and denies in part, conditionally certifying two classes (Crane Operators; Roughneck/Riggers) and setting a three-year lookback ending January 12, 2012, with data production and notice procedures ordered.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether to approve conditional certification and notice | Plaintiffs contend Lusardi-based approach supports notice to similarly situated workers. | Defendant argues individualized inquiries predominate due to contractor/employee status and merits should be considered. | Granted in part; two classes certified with notice authorized. |
| Whether Crane Operators and Roughneck/Riggers are similarly situated within groups | Plaintiffs show group-specific duties and shared overtime policy within each position. | Defendant argues substantial differences between positions negate similarity. | Crane Operators and Roughneck/Riggers are similarly situated within their respective positions. |
| What is the proper class period and scope of potential class members | Plaintiffs seek up to three years prior to filing date consistent with FLSA willfulness. | Defendant argues for narrower or different scope based on policy changes. | Class period ends January 12, 2012; end date tied to policy change; only those classified as independent contractors during period included. |
| Whether the court may order production of potential class member data | Data needed to implement notice and identify opt-ins. | Requests for personal data should be limited and carefully controlled. | Defense ordered to provide usable electronic data (names, addresses, emails, dates) for Crane Operators and Roughneck/Riggers from May 7, 2009 to January 12, 2012; parties to propose notice content and distribution. |
Key Cases Cited
- Lusardi v. Xerox Corp., 118 F.R.D. 351 (D.N.J. 1987) (foundation of Lusardi two-step approach to conditional certification)
- Shushan v. Univ. of Colorado at Boulder, 132 F.R.D. 263 (D. Colo. 1990) (review standard for class certification in early stage)
- Mooney v. Aramco Servs. Co., 54 F.3d 1207 (5th Cir. 1995) (development of collective action framework under FLSA)
- Tolentino v. C & J Spec-Rent Services, Inc., 716 F.Supp.2d 642 (S.D. Tex. 2010) (factors for 'similarly situated' analysis and stage considerations)
- England v. New Century Fin. Corp., 370 F.Supp.2d 504 (M.D. La. 2005) (comments on properly assessing common policy and practice at notice stage)
- Villarreal v. St. Luke's Episcopal Hospital, 751 F.Supp.2d 902 (S.D. Tex. 2010) (illustrates limitations on broad groupings for 'similarly situated')