Labor & Employment Law Daily Wrap Up, WAGE-HOUR—CLASS ACTIONS—Other litigation developments, (Sep 11, 2025)

By WK Editorial Staff

A roundup of court actions granting conditional certification of FLSA collective and Rule 23 class actions of interest to the labor and employment community.

Servers at a restaurant alleged that their employer failed to provide the notice required under the FLSA before taking a tip credit, asserting that they were not informed of the amount of the claimed tip credit, their right to retain tips (absent a valid, tip-pooling arrangement), or the legal requirement; FLSA collective (Maffeo v. Dagwoods North, LLC, No. 4:24-cv-03704-JD (D.S.C. Aug. 1, 2025)).

Utility locators alleged that the employer failed to pay employees for compensable “off-the-clock” work (work employees were allegedly required to complete during their meal breaks, as well as before clocking in and after clocking out), and that it failed to include “auto pay” allowance in their regular rate of pay for calculating the appropriate amount of overtime pay; Rule 23 class (Loonsfoot v. Stake Center Locating, LLC, No. 3:23-CV-03171-DWD (S.D. Ill. Aug. 8, 2025)).

Designers for an energy company were granted a motion for issuance of a notice of proposed subclasses of piping designers, I & E designers, and civil survey designers who used computer-aided design software to perform tasks; FLSA collective (Hamilton v. NorthStar Energy, Services, Inc., No. 23-3501 (S.D. Tex. Aug. 6, 2025)).

Inspector alleged that after resolution of a wage dispute, the employer violated the FLSA’s anti-retaliation provision by laying off or not sending class members out of work notice of their next project; instead sending newly hired inspectors to work in their place; FLSA collective (Cox v. TJ Inspection, Inc., No. CIV-23-187-G (W.D. Okla. Aug. 12, 2025)).

Budtenders, who were store associates for a marijuana dispensary, alleged the employer violated the FLSA because its tip policy disseminated pooled tip money to store “leads” who did not interact with or serve customers and had supervisory responsibilities; FLSA collective (Beck v. Curaleaf, Inc., No. SAG-25-00741(D. Md. Aug. 13, 2025)).

Certified nursing assistant alleged that the employer denied overtime pay because of a practice of automatically deducting 30 minutes of mealtime from employees’ pay, even though it interrupted lunch breaks and required them to work or be “on call” during breaks; FLSA collective (Cole v. Universal Health Care/Blumenthal Inc., No. 1:24CV576 (M.D.N.C. Aug. 15, 2025)).

Barista was granted motion for class certification of a Rule 23 class alleging the employer improperly withheld portions of all tipped employees’ tipped wages in violation of NYLL § 196-d, by instituting uniform policies of retaining five percent of all tips, retaining a cut of tips for the employer’s account, and requiring that tips be shared with management employees; Rule 23 class (Erickson v. Fellini Soho Corp., No. 25-CV-1344(JPO) (S.D.N.Y. Aug 18, 2025)).

Call center employees alleged that the employer’s timekeeping system suffered a ransomware attack that caused a temporary loss of time and pay data, such that “paychecks during the outage were inaccurate and short in one or more of the impacted workweeks,” and the employer failed to pay employees their full overtime premiums; FLSA collective (Lee v. Sutherland Global Services, Inc., No. 6:23-CV-06549 EAW CDH (W.D.N.Y. Aug. 22, 2025)).

Cone packer for a food processing company alleged the employer only paid class members for work between their scheduled start and stop times, and not for work performed pre- and post-shift, “including: (a) changing into and out of [their] personal protective equipment; (b) washing [their] hands; (c) obtaining [their] work assignments/locations; and (d) walking to and from [their] assigned area of the manufacturing floor”; FLSA collective (Davey v. Joy Cone Co., No. 2:24-CV-1246 (W.D. Pa. Aug. 22, 2025)).

Department managers for a supermarket chain granted a motion for conditional certification of two classes of managers who allege the employer misclassified them as exempt from overtime under the FLSA and Illinois law, but motion for Rule 23 class certification was denied; FLSA collective and Rule 23 class (Depyper v. Roundy’s Supermarkets Inc., Nos. 20 C 2317 and 20 C 2084 (N.D. Ill. Aug. 22, 2025)).

Employees of healthcare provider brought state-law claims alleging the employer failed to pay wages due and failed to pay overtime in violation of the North Carolina Wage and Hour Act; Rule 23 class (Wade v. JMJ Enterprises, LLC, No. 1:21CV506 (M.D.N.C. Aug. 29, 2025)).

Delivery driver for a pizza store was granted a motion for a Rule 23 class action and FLSA collective action alleging the employer required delivery drivers to provide vehicles for work but inadequately reimbursed them for work-related vehicle expenses, which caused them to be paid less than minimum wage; FLSA collective and Rule 23 class (Dietrich v. Romeo’s Pizza, Inc., No. 1:19 CV 2092 (N.D. Ohio Aug. 29, 2025)).

Cases: WageHour ClassActions EmployeeStatus WorkingTime Overtime MinimumWage Exemptions StateLawClaims