Imbarrato v. Banta Management Services, Inc.
- Nelson Roman
- 7:18-cv-05422
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 15
In Imbarrato v. Banta Management, Judge Roman granted in part and denied in part workers’ request to notify potential wage-claim participants.
The ruling affects the plaintiffs, the defendants, and tipped employees who worked at the defendants’ three Buffalo Wild Wings restaurants from September 26, 2013, to the present and may choose to join the FLSA collective action.
What happened
In Imbarrato v. Banta Management Services, Inc., former restaurant servers Patrick Imbarrato and Nick Praino claimed that the defendants violated federal and New York wage laws by improperly using a tip credit, requiring too much non-tipped work, and failing to pay certain wages and provide required wage information. They asked to notify other tipped employees who worked at the defendants’ three Buffalo Wild Wings restaurants.
The court conditionally approved the wage collective action because the plaintiffs made the required preliminary showing that other tipped employees may have been subject to common pay practices. The court authorized notice by mail, email, text message, and posting at the three restaurants, allowed a three-year notice period, and allowed time limits on potential claims to be paused until notice was sent. It also ordered the defendants to provide names, addresses, phone numbers, email addresses, work locations, and employment dates, but denied the request for Social Security numbers.
Judge Nelson S. Roman ruled that the plaintiffs’ motion was granted in part and denied in part. The ruling was preliminary and did not decide whether the defendants actually violated wage laws.
The detailed version
- Imbarrato v. Banta Management Services, Inc. · No. 7:18-cv-05422
- Nelson Roman
- Apr. 25, 2022
Background
Patrick Imbarrato and Nick Praino, former servers at the defendants’ Buffalo Wild Wings restaurant in Middletown, New York, brought claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and New York Labor Law. They alleged that the defendants applied a tip credit while requiring tipped employees to perform excessive non-tip-producing side work; failed to pay proper minimum and overtime wages; failed to pay certain New York spread-of-hours and call-in pay; and failed to provide required wage notices and statements. The plaintiffs sought to represent other tipped employees who worked at any of the defendants’ three franchised Buffalo Wild Wings restaurants.
The plaintiffs asked the court to conditionally certify an FLSA collective action, approve notices to potential participants, and require expedited discovery. Conditional certification is an early-stage decision allowing notice to be sent to workers who may choose to join an FLSA lawsuit. It does not decide the ultimate merits of the wage claims.
Conditional Certification
The court applied the FLSA’s two-step process for collective actions. At the first step, plaintiffs must make a modest factual showing that they and potential participants were victims of a common policy or plan that violated the law. The court does not weigh the merits, resolve factual disputes, or decide credibility at this stage.
The court found that the plaintiffs met this preliminary standard. Their declarations described the non-tipped tasks employees were required to perform, including the types and timing of the work. The court also found an adequate preliminary showing that the alleged practices were common among the defendants’ three Buffalo Wild Wings locations. The court therefore granted conditional class certification.
Notice
The court allowed notice to potential opt-in plaintiffs. It accepted the plaintiffs’ revised proposed notice as modified and approved notice describing claims involving minimum wages, overtime pay, and other wages. The court found that the notice made clear that joining the lawsuit was voluntary and that potential participants could obtain their own lawyers.
The court allowed a three-year notice period. It also allowed equitable tolling—pausing the applicable time limit for potential opt-in plaintiffs—until the plaintiffs sent the notice. The court cited the significant delay in ruling on the motion and found a particularly strong basis for tolling in this case.
The court authorized notice by mail, email, and text message, and approved posting the notice at the defendants’ three franchised restaurants: BWW Middletown, BWW Wappingers Falls, and BWW Oneonta. The notice was authorized for tipped employees employed by the defendants from September 26, 2013, to the present.
Discovery
The plaintiffs sought computer-readable lists containing potential participants’ names, addresses, Social Security numbers, telephone numbers, email addresses, work locations, and employment dates. Because the court authorized email and text-message notice, it found that telephone numbers, email addresses, work locations, and employment dates were needed for notification.
The court granted the request for disclosure of names, last known addresses, telephone numbers, email addresses, work locations, and employment dates for tipped employees at the three locations from September 26, 2013, to the present. The court denied the request for Social Security numbers at that stage, while stating that the plaintiffs could ask the court to reconsider if many notices were returned as undeliverable.
Disposition
The court’s conclusion states that the plaintiffs’ motion for conditional certification of the FLSA collective action, approval of the proposed notices, and discovery was granted in part and denied in part. The parties were directed to contact Magistrate Judge Judith C. McCarthy within seven days regarding expedited production of discovery. The court did not decide whether the defendants ultimately violated the FLSA or New York Labor Law.
Read the full 15-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.