Adams v. The City Of New York

Background

Jerome Adams and other Fraud Investigators and Associate Fraud Investigators for New York City’s Human Resources Administration brought claims against the City under the Fair Labor Standards Act’s overtime provisions. The court had conditionally certified a collective action on June 29, 2017. After discovery, the City moved to decertify the collective action.

Magistrate Judge Stewart Aaron issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that the court deny decertification. The City objected, arguing generally that the workers were not affected by a common policy concerning unpaid pre-shift, post-shift, or meal-period work. The City also argued that Fraud Investigators at different levels and Associate Fraud Investigators had materially different responsibilities, that the claims depended on individual employment circumstances, and that the City had individualized defenses.

Court’s Analysis

Judge Abrams explained that specific objections to a magistrate judge’s recommendation receive fresh review, while general objections or repetition of earlier arguments receive review for clear error. The court found that the City’s objections largely repeated arguments it had already made in its decertification motion, so it reviewed the recommendation for clear error.

The court found no clear error in Judge Aaron’s conclusion that collective treatment was appropriate. At this stage, the plaintiffs had to make a persuasive showing that the original and participating plaintiffs were similarly situated victims of a Fair Labor Standards Act violation arising from a systematically applied policy or practice. The court stated that this standard had been met. It also clarified that Judge Aaron had not found that the City definitively had a policy of refusing to pay the workers; he had found that the plaintiffs had made the required showing that their off-the-clock claims were based on a common policy.

Ruling

Judge Ronnie Abrams adopted the Report and Recommendation in its entirety. The City’s motion for decertification was denied. The City’s alternative request to limit the collective action to claims involving overtime work that was not pre-approved was also denied. The clerk was directed to terminate the motion at Docket 127.