Royal

Bartenders and Personnel at Music Festival Allege Violation of FLSA

May 24, 2023

Fifteen people employed to work as bartenders and barbacks sued the company operating a music festival in September 2022. The employees alleged that the company failed to pay minimum wage, overtime, and tips required under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) as well as Virginia’s Wage Payment Act and Minimum Wage Act.


The fifteen employees who filed suit asserted their claims on behalf of nearly fifty other tipped employees. The employees (Plaintiffs) alleged that the company pooled all tips together and used a large portion of the tips to pay non-tip managerial employees. Moreover, the employees alleged that they worked 10-14 hours each day of the music festival and were only paid $5 per hour.



The company operating the music festival argued that class certification was not warranted because the nearly fifty employees did not prove they were all similarly situated. And even if they did, the case would be unmanageable because the court would have to inquire about each claimant’s experience working at the festivals.


The U.S. District Judge in this matter disagreed. The judge stated in his recent opinion that, “At bottom, Plaintiffs’ evidentiary showing suffices at this stage of the case to establish that Plaintiffs and the other proposed collective action members are ‘similarly situated’ for purposes of the FLSA, and further, that no individualized inquiry would render inefficient their proceeding as a collective action,” he wrote. “Plaintiffs have established their entitlement to conditional certification of their FLSA collective action.”


The standard in this scenario requires, “only minimal evidence, such as factual evidence by affidavits or other means,” Here, the judge held that the employees had met that burden.


If your business has any questions on this topic or any other matters, please do not hesitate to contact the attorneys at The Royal Law Firm at 413-586-2288.

Massachusetts’ Superior Court Judge Rules Recording in Workplace Admissible

February 19, 2025
The Massachusetts Superior Court found that Massachusetts’ wiretap statue does not bar employers from using allegedly illegally obtained recordings in civil proceedings. In a recent case, an employee claimed she was forced to resign. Plaintiff’s coworker recorded an argument between the Plaintiff and her supervisor without her consent and shared it with supervisors. The employee then sued for discrimination and retaliation, along with two counts for violation of the wiretap statute. Massachusetts is a two-party consent state but, in this case, it was found that the consent of only one party was needed because nothing in the Wiretap Statute bars the use of an allegedly illegally obtained communication in a civil proceeding. The court found that the provisions about the use of illegally obtained communications in evidence are limited to criminal trials. However, depending on the court, results may differ, as this recording was central to proving and/or disproving the Plaintiff’s claim, and as such, the recording was indispensable as a piece of evidence. Issues with unauthorized recordings have been arising all the time in civil proceedings because recording devices are everywhere, whether they be a cell phone, laptop or other recording device. This ruling is good for employers, as if there is an otherwise inadmissible recording that is made that disproves an employee’s claims, it can be admissible as evidence if meets the same scenario above. However, employers must be careful to use these recordings as they may be inadmissible and may not show the same thing that the employer believes in the court’s eyes. This being said, it is prudent to consult an attorney before utilizing a recording for any employment action or in legal action to avoid unwanted consequences. If your business has any questions on this topic or any other matters, please do not hesitate to contact the attorneys at The Royal Law Firm at 413-586-2288.

After the DEI Executive Order

February 14, 2025
What Are the Compliance Requirements for Private Employers?
Share by: