Sarr v. Sinergia, Inc.
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:22-cv-03610
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Sarr v. Sinergia, Judge Caproni denied Defendants’ request to narrow or further stay conditional certification of an FLSA collective.
The existing conditionally certified group of Sinergia direct support professionals who worked on or after May 4, 2019, as well as the parties to the FLSA collective action. The court did not narrow the group in this order.
What happened
Sarr v. Sinergia, Inc. concerns Defendants’ request to change an earlier order that conditionally certified a group of direct support professionals under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Defendants argued that only workers in Sinergia’s residential services program could be covered, not workers in its other programs.
The Court denied the request. It did not amend the October 4, 2022 order, which covered direct support professionals who worked at Sinergia on or after May 4, 2019. Defendants also asked that notice distribution remain stayed while the parties investigated coverage, but the court’s endorsement states that the request was denied.
Judge Valerie Caproni explained that Defendants should have raised the coverage argument when the court considered conditional certification. The court kept the existing deadlines stayed through November 18, 2022, and addressed the parties’ next steps concerning the proposed notice and consent form.
The detailed version
- Sarr v. Sinergia, Inc. · No. 1:22-cv-03610
- Valerie Caproni
- Nov. 14, 2022
Background
The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) permits certain employees to pursue wage claims together in a collective action. In an October 4, 2022 order, the court conditionally certified a collective of Sinergia direct support professionals (DSPs) who worked there at any time on or after May 4, 2019.
After Sarr filed a First Amended Class and Collective Action Complaint, Defendants asked the court to amend the conditional-certification order. They argued that the amended allegations showed that only Sinergia’s residential services program could potentially fall within the FLSA. In the alternative, Defendants asked the court to keep notice distribution stayed while the parties conducted discovery about FLSA coverage.
Defendants relied on a prior Southern District of New York decision discussed in their letter. They argued that an organization’s overall revenue and unified control do not necessarily make all of its programs part of one FLSA-covered enterprise. According to Defendants, only DSPs who worked in Sinergia’s residential services program could potentially be covered, while DSPs in non-residential programs could not opt into the FLSA collective.
Ruling
Judge Valerie Caproni denied the request. The court stated that it would not amend the October 4, 2022 order because Defendants should have raised the coverage argument when the court was considering conditional certification. The court also stated that Defendants had not timely moved for reconsideration.
The endorsement states that all deadlines were stayed through November 18, 2022, the deadline for Defendants to move for judgment on the pleadings on the First Amended Complaint. If Defendants did not file that motion, the parties’ deadline to jointly submit a proposed notice and consent form was December 2, 2022. If they could not agree, they were required to submit a joint letter describing their remaining disagreements by that date.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.