You Can Trust Us / Basic information / Claudia Gayle vs Harry’s Nurses Registry (CV-07-4672)
1.Why did I get this notice?
Harry’s records show that you currently work, or previously worked, for Harry’s as a registry nurse, field nurse or per diem nurse
This notice informs you of the existence of a collective action lawsuit in which you may become a member. It also explains what you need to do to participate and how your rights may be affected.
On March 9, 2009, the Honorable Charles P. Sifton, Senior Judge of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, authorized the sending of this Notice to inform you of your rights to join this lawsuit
2. What is a collective action and who is involved?
In a collective action lawsuit, two or more people who have similar claims against an employer are permitted to assert those claims in a single lawsuit. The people who decide to participate in the lawsuit are called the plaintiffs. The employers they sued (in this case, Harry’s) are called the defendants. One Court resolves the issues for everyone in the collective action – except for those people who choose not to join.
In this case, the Court has determined that Harry’s registry nurses are entitled to be paid time and a half for their overtime hours.
3. What does the lawsuit complain about?
In the lawsuit, the plaintiffs claim that Harry’s had a practice of misclassifying registry nurses as “independent contractors.” The plaintiffs allege that Harry’s did not pay employees as required by law, and claim that they are owed unpaid overtime as a result, as well as additional damages that may be allowed by the law and attorneys’ fees.
4. How does Harry’s answer?
Harry’s has asserted that it exercised good faith in their application of the Fair Labor Standard Act to their employees.
5. Has the Court decided who is right?
The Court has decided that the plaintiffs are correct, that is, that Harry’s registry nurses are entitled to be paid time and a half for their overtime hours.
Once people have had the chance to opt in, the Court will decide whether people who have opted in may participate in the case. Only people ” similarly situated” to the plaintiffs may participate. To determine whether you are indeed a proper member of the case, Harry’s will likely ask the Court to engage in a review of the circumstances of your employment.
Gayle v. Harry’s Nurses Registry
Judge Explains $619,071 Award In Nurses’ Action for Overtime Pay
Judge Nicholas Garaufis
Gayle and her co-plaintiff nurses were employed by Harry’s Nurses Registry. The court granted collective action certification of their Fair Labor Standards Act suit over unpaid overtime. It also granted them summary judgment as to liability. Granting plaintiffs summary judgment as to damages, the court awarded them $619,071. Based on the record evidence opt-in plaintiffs were entitled to $309,535 in unpaid overtime premiums. In finding plaintiffs entitled to that same amount in liquidated damages pursuant to 29 USC §216(c), the court observed that its determination that defendants did not show good faith with respect to Gayle sufficient to overcome the presumption favoring liquidated damages, was equally true with respect to the opt-in plaintiffs. Despite denying defendants’ motion to strike plaintiffs’ reply memorandum of law, the court denied plaintiffs’ motion seeking sanctions under 28 USC §1927 for the strike motion. Noting that some of defendants’ assertions within the strike motion held merit, the court rejected plaintiffs’ claim that the strike motion had been brought in bad faith solely for dilatory purposes because it discussed only de minimus ambiguities and discrepancies in plaintiffs’ documentary evidence.
Link to read: https://www.law.com/newyorklawjournal/almID/1202571955076/
