Muhammad v. Alto Pharmacy LLC

Background

Plaintiffs Afiyfah Muhammad, Darwin Wilson, and Dominique Skinner worked as couriers or delivery drivers for Alto Pharmacy LLC in New York City. They alleged that Alto treated couriers as independent contractors even though it controlled their schedules, routes, deliveries, performance monitoring, discipline, and pay rates. They also alleged that couriers worked more than 40 hours in some weeks, were paid a flat hourly rate for all hours, and did not receive the overtime premium required by the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). Plaintiffs further alleged that Alto reduced recorded work hours and retained much of the tips paid by customers. Alto disputed the allegations about timekeeping and maintained that its system calculated pay from the clock-in and clock-out times entered by couriers.

Plaintiffs sued under the FLSA and New York Labor Law. They sought conditional certification under 29 U.S.C. § 216(b), a preliminary step that allows notice to be sent to potentially similarly situated workers who may choose to join an FLSA collective action. The motion concerned only conditional certification and notice; the court explained that this stage was not a decision on the merits and did not permit resolution of factual disputes, ultimate legal issues, or witness credibility.

Conditional Certification

The court held that plaintiffs satisfied the required modest factual showing. Each plaintiff stated that they worked more than 40 hours in a workweek and were paid a flat rate for all hours worked. They also stated that Alto required couriers to sign independent-contractor agreements and subjected them to common timekeeping policies. Alto did not dispute that it treated couriers as independent contractors through July 16, 2024, or that it paid a flat rate for all hours. Alto also stated that at least 30 couriers worked more than 40 hours in a workweek during the relevant period.

The court declined to limit the collective to those 30 couriers. Plaintiffs stated that they had spoken with other couriers who reported working more than 40 hours and having their hours reduced. Because the proposed collective covered people performing the same courier function, the court found it premature to restrict notice to Alto’s identified list.

The court approved a collective consisting of individuals who worked as couriers or delivery drivers for Alto in New York City at any time from January 1, 2021, through July 16, 2024. The court found the three-year notice period appropriate because plaintiffs alleged willful violations, but it did not decide whether the alleged violations were willful or resolve any statute-of-limitations defenses.

Equitable Tolling

Equitable tolling is a court-created extension of a filing deadline in rare circumstances. Plaintiffs requested it but offered no substantial argument beyond noting that many potential participants no longer worked for Alto. The court found that plaintiffs had not alleged exceptional circumstances and did not grant equitable tolling at that time. The court expressly stated that this ruling was made without prejudice to plaintiffs’ right to renew the request after additional discovery or facts supporting it.

Notice and Opt-In Procedures

The court required the parties to meet and confer about a revised notice and submit it within two weeks. The notice had to correct the proposed consent form, refer only to federal FLSA claims rather than state-law claims, and make other changes identified by the court. The court authorized text-message distribution and directed the parties to confer about the text notice. It set a 60-day period for potential participants to opt into the collective, rejecting plaintiffs’ request for 90 days because they had not shown special circumstances.

Contact Information and Disposition

Within two weeks, Alto was ordered to provide information for anyone who worked as a courier or delivery person for Alto in New York from January 1, 2021, through July 16, 2024. The information included names, titles, last known phone numbers, addresses, email addresses, dates of employment, and positions, as described in the order.

The court granted plaintiffs’ motion to conditionally certify the FLSA collective. It did not determine whether Alto violated the FLSA or New York Labor Law, whether the couriers were employees, or whether any individual ultimately could recover overtime wages.