Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-almd-2_04-cv-01186/USCOURTS-almd-2_04-cv-01186-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 710
Nature of Suit: Fair Labor Standards Act
Cause of Action: 29:201 Fair Labor Standards Act

---

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION

DAVID SNOWDEN, individually )

and on behalf of all others )

similarly situated, et al., )

 )

Plaintiffs, )

)

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO.

) 2:04cv1186-MHT

FRED’S STORES OF ) (WO) 

TENNESSEE, INC., )

)

Defendant. )

OPINION

This case is currently before the court on plaintiffs

David Snowden, Sarah Hill, and Sharon Glanton and

defendant Fred’s Stores of Tennessee, Inc.’s joint motion

to approve settlements of plaintiffs’ claims under the

Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), 29 U.S.C. §§ 201-219.

For the reasons that follow, the motion will be granted

and the settlements will be approved.

Because the FLSA was enacted to protect workers from

the poor wages and long hours that can result from great

Case 2:04-cv-01186-MHT-SRW Document 79 Filed 03/28/06 Page 1 of 4
2

inequalities in bargaining power between employers and

employees, the FLSA’s provisions are mandatory and,

except in two narrow circumstances, are generally not

subject to bargaining, waiver, or modification by

contract or settlement. Brooklyn Savings Bank v. O’Neil,

324 U.S. 697, 706 (1945). The first exception is that

the Secretary of Labor may supervise the payment of back

wages to employees; employees who accept such payments

waive their rights to bring suits for liquidated damages,

provided the employer pays the back amount in full. 29

U.S.C. § 216(c); Lynn’s Food Stores, Inc. v. United

States, 679 F.2d 1350, 1352-53 (11th Cir. 1982).

The second route to settlement, and the one that is

applicable here, occurs when an employee brings a private

action for back wages under 29 U.S.C. § 216(b); the

employee and employer present a proposed settlement to

the district court, and the district court reviews the

judgment and enters it as a stipulated judgment. Lynn’s

Food Stores, 679 F.2d at 1354 (“Settlements may be

Case 2:04-cv-01186-MHT-SRW Document 79 Filed 03/28/06 Page 2 of 4
3

permissible in the context of a suit brought by employees

under the FLSA for back wages because initiation of the

action by the employees provides some assurance of an

adversarial context. The employees are likely to be

represented by an attorney who can protect their rights

under the statute. Thus, when the parties submit a

settlement to the court for approval, the settlement is

more likely to reflect a reasonable compromise of

disputed issues than a mere waiver of statutory rights

brought about by an employer’s overreaching.”).

In reviewing a settlement of an FLSA private claim,

a court must “scrutiniz[e] the settlement for fairness,”

id. at 1353, and determine that the settlement is a “fair

and reasonable resolution of a bona fide dispute over

FLSA provisions,” id. at 1355. “If a settlement in an

employee FLSA suit does reflect a reasonable compromise

over issues, such as FLSA coverage or computation of back

wages, that are actually in dispute[,] the district court

[may] approve the settlement in order to promote the

Case 2:04-cv-01186-MHT-SRW Document 79 Filed 03/28/06 Page 3 of 4
* In Lynn’s Food Stores, the court disallowed a

compromise because it was not brought in the context of

an employee lawsuit, but rather was an attempt by an

employer to “settle” backpay claims because of a pending

investigation by the Secretary of Labor. The

“compromise” was unfair and reflected the extreme

inequalities of bargaining position that the FLSA was

designed to protect against.

policy of encouraging settlement of litigation.” Id. at

1354.*

As to the claims of plaintiffs Snowden Hill, and

Glanton, there are bona fide disputes over FLSA

provisions, namely FLSA coverage and the amount of

backpay. Further, after reviewing the settlement

agreements, the court concludes that the settlements are

a fair and reasonable resolution of these bona fide

disputes.

An appropriate judgment will be entered.

DONE, this the 28th day of March, 2006.

_____________________________ /s/ Myron H. Thompson

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 2:04-cv-01186-MHT-SRW Document 79 Filed 03/28/06 Page 4 of 4