Collective actions under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and class actions under many state wage payment laws continue to be a popular tool by which employees may pursue claims of back pay and overtime. In the wage and hour context, a court may allow individual employee claims to be combined into one action if it determines that there are common issues of fact and law, and that combining the claims is the best way to fairly and efficiently resolve the dispute.

Recently, the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a $5.8 million wage and hour jury verdict in favor of a class of Tysons Foods employees working at the company’s Storm Lake, Iowa meat production plant. Tysons calculated the employees’ compensable work time by measuring “gang time”–the period in which each employee was at their workstation and the chicken processing production line was moving.

The employees filed suit under the FLSA and the Iowa Wage Payment Collection Law (IWPCL), claiming compensation for time spent “donning” (putting on) and “doffing” (taking off) certain personal protective equipment before and after the production process. While Tysons paid employees several set minutes of time per day to account for the donning and doffing of the safety equipment, the employees alleged that they were not adequately compensated for the actual time spent performing these tasks. Notably, Tysons did not record the actual time spent by employees donning and doffing safety equipment.  

Following a nine-day jury trial in which the employees presented evidence of liability and damages by using individual time sheets, as well as average donning, doffing and walking times, the jury returned a verdict for the employees in the amount of nearly $2.9 million in unpaid compensation. The employees were awarded another $2.9 million in liquidated damages.

Following trial, Tysons appealed the decision, asserting that the district court incorrectly certified the employees’ claims as a collective action under the FLSA and as a class action under the IWPCL. In rejecting Tysons’ argument, the 8th Circuit noted the discretion trial courts have in determining whether to certify a group of employees as a collective and class action, and found that while there were some differences with respect to the employees’ routines, the claims were not “dominated by individual issues” to prevent a “one stroke” determination.

Additionally, in affirming the district court’s decision, the 8th Circuit also rejected Tysons’ argument that the employees failed to present sufficient evidence to prove damages on a class-wide basis, noting that “when an employer has failed to keep proper records, courts should not hesitate to award damages based on the just and reasonable inference from the evidence presented.”