The Cuyahoga County
Court of Appeals recently issued a highly favorable opinion for employees
seeking overtime and minimum wage payments. In Porter v. AJ Automotive Group, Inc.,
2015-Ohio-3769 (8th Dist., Sept. 17, 2015), plaintiffs claimed nonpayment of
minimum wages and overtime under the Fair Labor Standards Act
("FLSA") and the Ohio Minimum Fair Wage Standards Act
("OMFWSA"). The trial court decided that defendants were not "employers"
as defined under the FLSA and the OMFWSA because plaintiffs did not establish
that they met the $150,000 revenue threshold, but invoked its "equitable
powers" and awarded plaintiffs the difference between what defendants had
paid them and what they should have, and awarded plaintiff the difference. The
trial court, however, did not not award liquidated damages, attorney's fees and
costs which were otherwise available under the FLSA and the OMFWSA. Plaintiffs
appealed that portion of the decision.
The court of appeals
reversed, explaining:
{¶8}
According to the trial court's decision, it reasoned that the OMFWSA did not
apply because plaintiffs failed to establish that AJ Automotive
and Andrew Jackson met the definition of "employer" as contained in
R.C. 4111.03(D)(2), which provides in relevant part:
(2)
"Employer" means * * * any individual, partnership, association,
corporation, business trust, or any person or group of persons, acting in the
interest of any employer in relation to an employee, but does not include an
employer whose annual gross volume of sales made for business done is less than
one hundred fifty thousand dollars * * *.
{¶9}
The trial court's reliance on this section to deny plaintiffs protection under
the OMFWSA was flawed for two reasons. First, this section applies to
"overtime" and does not relate to a claim for failure to pay minimum
wage, which is the bulk of Porter and White's claims. R.C. 4111.02, which
governs an employer's duty to pay minimum wage, expressly states that "[e]very
employer, as defined in Section 34a, Article II, Ohio Constitution, shall pay
each of the employer's employees at a wage rate of not less than the wage rate
specified in Section 34a of Article II, Ohio Constitution." The statute
does not contain a sales threshold within the definition of an employer.
{¶10} Article II, Section 34a, Ohio Constitution sets forth that "`employer' and `employee' shall have the same meanings as under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act or its successor law * * *." Under the federal FLSA, AJ Automotive and Andrew Jackson satisfy the broad definition of "employer," which is defined as "any person acting directly or indirectly in the interest of an employer in relation to an employee * * *." 29 U.S.C. 203(d).
{¶10} Article II, Section 34a, Ohio Constitution sets forth that "`employer' and `employee' shall have the same meanings as under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act or its successor law * * *." Under the federal FLSA, AJ Automotive and Andrew Jackson satisfy the broad definition of "employer," which is defined as "any person acting directly or indirectly in the interest of an employer in relation to an employee * * *." 29 U.S.C. 203(d).
The court further stated
that employers have the burden of proving their business' gross volume is
less than $150,000 (citing Graham v. Harbour, 20
Ohio App.3d 293, 297, 486 N.E.2d 184 (10th Dist.1984).
The lesson here is that
Ohio plaintiff's employment lawyers should plead overtime and minimum wage
claims under the OMFWSA as well as under the FLSA. Moreover, according to Judge
Robert McClelland of the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas, trial courts
have equitable authority to award minimum wages and overtime, even if the FLSA
and OMFWSA do not apply. Clearly a victory for plaintiffs. Kudos to plaintiffs'
lawyer, Alan Goodman, for his work on this case.
No comments:
Post a Comment