Austin Cook, Harrison Follett, Charlie Allen, Sophie Sanders, Thomas Bartell, Justin Roberts, Carson McMaster, Alonso Barrantes, Brady Perkins, Jeremy Thompson, Paige Ludden, Keaton Hales, Trooper Johnson, Ryan Grimnius, Aidan Walsh, and Ryan Hadley v. Dava Marketing, LLC, and Does 1-10

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of Utah grants in part the plaintiffs’ motion for conditional certification of an FLSA collective action against Dava Marketing, LLC. The court approves a collective consisting of current and former hourly employees who performed specified video, design, and social-media duties and worked more than 40 hours in a workweek during the applicable limitations period. The court also addresses notice methods, disclosure of potential collective members’ contact information, the opt-in period, reminder notices, and revisions to the consent and notice forms.

Holdings

1. Conditional certification was appropriate because plaintiffs substantially alleged that Dava employees were similarly situated victims of common overtime policies and practices.
2. The collective includes all current and former employees paid by Dava on an hourly basis to sell, design, and edit videos and manage online and social-media content in the United States during the applicable limitations period who worked more than forty hours in any workweek.
3. Mail, email, and text-message notice may be used, but any text-message content must first be submitted to and approved by the court; the request for a case-specific website was denied without prejudice.
4. Dava must provide names, last known mailing addresses, last known telephone numbers, last known personal email addresses, and employment dates and locations for potential collective members within fourteen days; birth dates and Social Security numbers need not be disclosed.
5. A ninety-day opt-in period was reasonable.
6. Plaintiffs may not send a reminder notice to potential collective members who have not opted in after forty-five days.
7. The consent form may designate the original plaintiffs as representative plaintiffs authorized to make litigation decisions for opt-in employees, but it must refer to the plural named plaintiffs. The notice must also remove language urging recipients to return forms promptly and language directing potential retaliation claimants to plaintiffs' counsel.

Questions Presented

1. Whether plaintiffs made the substantial allegations necessary for conditional certification of an FLSA collective action at the notice stage.
2. What employee group should be included in the conditionally certified FLSA collective.
3. What methods, information disclosures, opt-in period, reminder notices, and consent-form language were appropriate for notifying potential collective members.

Disposition

other