Background
Plaintiffs, including Nyesha Swope, worked at St. Martin’s in the Pines, a retirement and assisted living facility. During the pandemic, the facility implemented various pay incentives, including hazard pay and bonuses. Swope alleged the facility failed to include these payments in overtime calculations and retaliated against her for requesting leave to care for her mother. The district court granted partial summary judgment to the plaintiffs on hazard pay claims but granted summary judgment to the employer on retention bonus claims, unpaid lunch break claims, and FMLA claims.
The court’s reasoning
The court found that the plaintiffs’ claims were not moot because they never accepted the settlement checks offered by the employer. The court further ruled that the de minimis exception did not apply to the plaintiffs’ claims for regular overtime work. Regarding the retention bonuses, the court affirmed that the plaintiffs failed to plead these claims in their amended complaint. On the FMLA claims, the court held that Swope failed to provide adequate notice because she did not specify the anticipated duration of her leave for a foreseeable medical event.
What it means going forward
Employers must ensure that unaccepted settlement offers do not terminate FLSA litigation, and must provide precise duration details when employees request foreseeable leave under the FMLA.
Podcast (federal-narrative-summaries): Play in new window | Download