A cable installation company recently entered into a consent judgment with the U.S. Department of Labor, agreeing to pay over $1 million in back wages and liquidated damages to nearly 200 workers. [here] The consent judgment also enjoins the company -- and its former vice president -- from future violations of the FLSA. 

On July 2, 2012, the California Court of Appeal affirmed a trial court ruling denying class certification to a group of newspaper carriers claiming they were misclassified as independent contractors.  In Sotelo v. Medianews Group, Inc., the Court of Appeal concluded that plaintiffs’  proposed class of newspaper carriers could not be certified because the class was not ascertainable and common issues of law and fact did not predominate. 

Owners and operators of gentleman’s clubs recently received a new arrow in their quiver in the ongoing dispute over a question that has created a barrage of lawsuits across the industry – “Are exotic dancers employees?”  A decision from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas on July 12 answered this question in the negative, holding that exotic dancers were not employees under the FLSA or Arkansas Minimum Wage Act. 

For the past two years or so, perhaps the most anticipated rulemaking in the wage and hour world has been what has been described at various times as the "FLSA Recordkeeping" or "Right-to-Know" rulemaking.  As we have discussed previously on the blog, this expected regulation immediately drew the concern of the employer community when it was reported that it would require employers to prepare a written analysis of an employee’s exempt status under the FLSA, provide a copy of that analysis to the employee, and maintain a copy of that analysis for review by a Department of Labor Wage & Hour Division investigator.  More recent descriptions call that initial report into question, but the concern remained.