Beda v. The Nurtury at Flandreau, Inc.

Background

Jeniffer Beda and Nicole Garcia sued The Nurtury at Flandreau, Inc., The Nurtury of Larchmont, Inc., The Nurtury Montessori at North Avenue, LLC, Brianna Banahan, and Cathleen Billone under the Fair Labor Standards Act and certain New York Labor Law provisions. They alleged that the defendants did not pay them for work performed outside the classroom, did not pay the minimum wage for all hours worked, and did not pay overtime for hours exceeding 40 per week. They also alleged that the defendants required certain teachers to pay Montessori-training tuition.

Beda and Garcia asked the court to conditionally certify an FLSA collective action under Section 216(b). Conditional certification at this stage is an initial decision allowing notice to potential participants; it does not decide whether the defendants actually violated the law. The defendants did not file an opposition, but the court still required the plaintiffs to make the required modest factual showing.

Conditional Certification

The court found that the plaintiffs’ declarations sufficiently showed that other Assistant Teachers and Head Teachers were subject to the same alleged pay practices. The plaintiffs identified nine other workers and stated that they had observed or learned through conversations that those workers performed similar tasks for similar hours and were not paid for outside-classroom work or overtime.

The court conditionally certified a collective limited to Assistant Teachers and Head Teachers, also known as Lead Teachers or Teachers. It did not extend the collective to broader job categories because the plaintiffs had not provided sufficient detail about employees in different roles.

Contact Information and Notice

The court granted precertification discovery of contact information. The defendants were ordered to provide, within 14 days, available information for Assistant Teachers and Head Teachers employed at any of the defendants’ locations within the authorized period, including names, addresses, telephone numbers, email addresses, work locations, employment dates, and known languages.

The court approved the proposed notice with modifications. Notice must be limited to the certified job categories and to the three years before the complaint was filed on June 9, 2022. The notice must also include defense counsel’s contact information. The plaintiffs were directed to submit a revised proposed notice for approval within 14 days of the opinion and order.

The court granted distribution by mail and email, translation into English, Portuguese, Spanish, and any other language identified by the defendants, and posting of the notice and consent forms in a conspicuous place at all defendants’ locations. It also granted the request to send a reminder notice 30 days after the original mailing.

Equitable Tolling

Equitable tolling temporarily pauses a limitations period when extraordinary circumstances prevent timely action. The court granted the plaintiffs’ request because delays connected to extensions for the defendants’ opposition and settlement discussions could prejudice potential participants. The limitations period for potential opt-in plaintiffs was tolled from December 4, 2023, until the deadline for opting into the collective expired after notice was distributed.

Disposition and Classification

Judge Victoria Reznik granted the motion for conditional certification, granted the request for equitable tolling, granted the motion to issue notice subject to the stated modifications, and granted the motion for precertification contact-information discovery. The opinion did not decide the ultimate merits of the wage claims. The matter is classified as a procedural order because it addressed the process for notifying and adding potential plaintiffs, along with related discovery and tolling, rather than deciding whether the alleged wage violations occurred.