Overtime Attorney Blog

Noting that "people are not in prison for the purpose of enabling them to earn a living," the Seventh Circuit denied the prisoner's claim that his civil rights were violated when he was not paid minimum wage and overtime. The prisoner correctly argued that the FLSA contains no exemption for prisoners. However, the Seventh Circuit opines that "the reason the FLSA contains no express exception for prisoners is probably that the idea was too outlandish to occur to anyone when the legislation was under consideration by Congress."

The case is Sanders v. Hayden, --- F. 3d. ----, 2008 WL 4206842 (7th Cir. Sept. 12, 2008).

The FMLA's joint employer provisions are interpreted similarly to those of the FLSA. Here, an employee brought a suit for violation of her medical leave against a provider of emergency services. The provider obtained payroll and benefits services from two potentially larger employers. The larger employers also had the right to appoint board members to the direct employer.

The Seventh Circuit affirmed that the larger companies were not joint employers because they did not control Plaintiff's job duties. The Seventh Circuit noted no evidence that the board members acted in a representative capacity on behalf of the larger employers, a proposition that stretches common sense -- why else were they appointed?

The case is Moldenhauer v. Tazewell-Pekin Consol. Communications Center, 536 F.3d 640, 13 Wage & Hour Cas.2d (BNA) 1633 (7th Cir. July 31, 2008).

The Seventh Circuit overturned summary judgment against a plaintiff who could not remember when she worked overtime. In Brown v. Family Dollar Stores of Indiana, L.P., “Brown was unable to identify with specificity the hours or even days for which she worked overtime that was not properly paid.” However, because Brown testified the employer falsified records and the employer’s time records were inconsistent with known events, the Appellate Court ruled Brown could proceed with her claim.

It is well established that when an employer has not kept records, the burden is on the employer and a court may award approximate damages. The Seventh Circuit ruled that this same principle applies where the employer has time records but they are false. First, the Court relates Brown’s own testimony that managers manipulated time records. According to the Court, this testimony is sufficient to survive summary judgment. The Court further notes that Brown provided evidence that Family Dollar’s time records are contradicted by facts about the workday. For instance, Brown had to both open and close the store – she had the only key. However, Family Dollar’s records showed that she often clocked out before the store's closing.

In ruling, the Seventh Circuit relies on fundamental principles set forth in Anderson v. Mt. Clemens Pottery Co., 328 U.S. 680 (1946). The Court also notes the Eleventh Circuit made a similar ruling in Allen v. Board of Public Educ. for Bibb Cty., 495 F.3d 1306 (11th Cir. 2007).

The full citation is: Brown v. Family Dollar Stores of Indiana, LP, 534 F.3d 593, 156 Lab.Cas. P 35,458, 13 Wage & Hour Cas.2d (BNA) 1545, 2008 WL 2738063 (7th Cir. July 15, 2008).