Law360 quoted The Employment Law Group attorney Nicholas Woodfield regarding the law firm’s landmark unpaid wages victory in Randolph v. ADT Security Services, Inc. Judge Chasanow from the District Court of Maryland held that ADT violated the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) when it fired two commissioned salespeople because they complained to the Maryland Department of Labor, Licensing, and Regulation (DLLR) that they believed they should be paid for overtime. The plaintiffs purportedly submitted confidential documents to the DLLR to support their FLSA complaint.
Law360 wrote:
The court… determined that whether or not the plaintiffs’ [submission of confidential documents] were reasonable did not matter in this case because lodging an FLSA complaint is participation rather than opposition, and the Fourth Circuit has refused to apply any reasonableness requirement to participation in employment cases.
“[The decision] very clearly vocalizes that you have an absolute right to go to the DLLR or Department of Labor state agencies and support your claim with whatever documents you want,” said Nicholas Woodfield of The Employment Law Group, who represents the plaintiffs.
Noting that Thompson and Randolph were likely properly classified as exempt from the FLSA’s wage requirements based on the commissioned salesperson exemption, Woodfield told Law360 that the decision was especially important for employees because it clarified that their complaining activities — including providing supporting materials to agencies — are protected even if the underlying wage claim doesn’t pan out.
Related articles
- Former ADT Employees Win Summary Judgment in FLSA Unpaid Wages Lawsuit (unpaidovertimeblog.com)
- Kinder Morgan Employees Receive $830,000 in Unpaid Overtime Settlement (unpaidovertimeblog.com)
- House Hearing on FLSA (lawprofessors.typepad.com)
