Alvarez Chicas v. Kelco Construction, Inc.
- Stewart Aaron
- 1:21-cv-09014
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Alvarez Chicas v. Kelco Construction, Judge Aaron ordered notice postings at a depot and qualifying worksites in the collective action.
The order affected the plaintiffs seeking notice of the collective action and the defendants, who were required to identify qualifying worksites and post the required notices at those locations and at the central depot.
What happened
In Alvarez Chicas v. Kelco Construction, the parties disputed where notices about the collective action should be posted so potential plaintiffs could learn about the case and their opportunity to join.
The plaintiffs requested information about all worksites where class members were working, posting at those locations, records of future worksites, and an affidavit confirming compliance. The defendants said their outdoor construction and landscaping worksites generally lacked walls for posting, and offered to post notices at a central depot and about five worksites with trailers or common areas.
Judge Stewart D. Aaron ordered the defendants to identify by March 20, 2023, each Kelco Construction worksite with a trailer or other common area suitable for posting and provide the addresses to the plaintiffs’ counsel. The defendants also had to post the required notices by March 24, 2023, at the central depot at 25 Newton Place, Hauppauge, New York, and at each identified worksite.
The detailed version
- Alvarez Chicas v. Kelco Construction, Inc. · No. 1:21-cv-09014
- Stewart Aaron
- Mar. 16, 2023
Background
Following the Court’s February 19, 2023 Opinion and Order, the parties submitted a joint letter concerning the specific jobsite locations where required notices in the collective action should be posted.
The plaintiffs asked the Court to order the defendants to provide a list of all worksites where class members were presently working, identify whether notices were posted under specified provisions of the New York Labor Law, post notices at locations where notices had already been posted under those provisions, record locations where class members performed work during the opt-in period and whether notices were posted there, and provide an affidavit confirming compliance.
The defendants argued that their construction and landscaping business was conducted outdoors, so notices could not be posted at every worksite because many sites had no walls. They offered to post notices at the central depot at 25 Newton Place, Hauppauge, New York, and at approximately five worksites with trailers or other common areas suitable for posting. The defendants did not identify the precise number or locations of those worksites.
Court’s Analysis
The Court explained that the Fair Labor Standards Act does not require courts to facilitate notice, but district courts have discretion in appropriate cases to facilitate notice to potential plaintiffs about the case and their opportunity to join as plaintiffs. The Court also noted that courts routinely approve posting notice on employee bulletin boards and in other common areas, including when potential members will also receive notice by mail.
After reviewing the parties’ joint letter, the Court exercised its discretion to require posting at the central depot and at all Kelco Construction worksites with trailers or other common areas that would permit posting.
Order
The Court ordered defendants’ counsel, no later than March 20, 2023, to identify in a letter to plaintiffs’ counsel each Kelco Construction worksite with a trailer or other common area suitable for posting and to provide the corresponding addresses.
The Court further ordered the defendants, no later than March 24, 2023, to post the required notices at the central depot at 25 Newton Place, Hauppauge, New York, and at each worksite identified under the first paragraph of the order.
Disposition
The order resolved the parties’ dispute about notice-posting locations. It did not decide the underlying claims or state whether any party would ultimately prevail.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.