Following trial but before rendering a verdict, Judge Sarah S. Vance decertified a nationwide collective action of assistant store managers against their employer, Big Lots. The assistant store managers claimed they were improperly classified as exempt under the executive exemption.
Ultimately, however, the Court noted there were simply too many discrepancies between Plaintiffs to support class certification, which relies on the Plaintiffs being similarly situated.
The Court noted that three Lusardi factors are predominantly used to determine if members of class are similarly situate:
(1) the extent to which the employment settings of employees are similar or disparate; (2) the extent to which any defenses that an employer might have to overtime or misclassification claims are common or individuated; and (3) general fairness and procedural considerations.
561 F.Supp.2d at 573. The Court noted only a "handful" of courts have adopted the Rule 23 standards in overtime collective actions.
Unfortunately for Plaintiffs, the class was simply too diverse. The Court found that Plaintiffs moved away from their theory that the position was misclassified and toward a theory based on misclassification on an individual basis. The Court stated "it became obvious that [the Court] could not draw any reliable inferences about the job duties of Plaintiffs as a class." 561 F.Supp.2d at 587.
The citation is Johnson v. Big Lot Stores, Inc., 561 F.Supp.2d 567 (E.D.La June 20, 2008).
Ultimately, however, the Court noted there were simply too many discrepancies between Plaintiffs to support class certification, which relies on the Plaintiffs being similarly situated.
The Court noted that three Lusardi factors are predominantly used to determine if members of class are similarly situate:
(1) the extent to which the employment settings of employees are similar or disparate; (2) the extent to which any defenses that an employer might have to overtime or misclassification claims are common or individuated; and (3) general fairness and procedural considerations.
561 F.Supp.2d at 573. The Court noted only a "handful" of courts have adopted the Rule 23 standards in overtime collective actions.
Unfortunately for Plaintiffs, the class was simply too diverse. The Court found that Plaintiffs moved away from their theory that the position was misclassified and toward a theory based on misclassification on an individual basis. The Court stated "it became obvious that [the Court] could not draw any reliable inferences about the job duties of Plaintiffs as a class." 561 F.Supp.2d at 587.
The citation is Johnson v. Big Lot Stores, Inc., 561 F.Supp.2d 567 (E.D.La June 20, 2008).
Leave a comment