Tyson Don-Doff Case – Where Does It Stand?

In lieu of the recent developments in the class action against Tyson Foods, we wanted to make what’s going on a little more understandable. First off, certiorari. It’s a word (and a great word at that) that typically means little to those people who don’t get to add the fancy “Esq.” at the end of their names. So, what does it mean exactly?

Occasionally, the ruling in a case can be challenged, relinquishing the final say to a higher court. So, a “writ of certiorari” is essentially a formal request that is made asking a higher court to review a case. In the case against Tyson, a writ of certiorari was petitioned before the U.S. Supreme Court. The Supreme Court granted the petition – and the fact that they did is a big deal, considering that they only deal with around 80 cases every year. This then begs the question of why this case is significant enough to be brought before the highest court in the nation.

The lower court ruled in favor of Tyson’s employees, who claimed that they were not properly compensated for the time they spent putting on and taking off (“donning and doffing”) the protective gear that they are required by law to wear. Tyson challenged the $5.8 million win for the workers, standing by their claim that the group of people affected was too varied to be given class certification. And thus, the case heads to court yet again.

So where does that leave the case now?

The case’s reappearance before the Supreme Court last week shows that Tyson’s workers aren’t likely to find favor in court a second time. Attorneys on the side on the plaintiffs are claiming that the employees are owed wages for the time it takes them to dress in their protective gear, but Tyson has a problem with that. Because of the way the amount of overtime was calculated (taking a sample of workers and averaging their dressing time), Tyson claims that the workers failed to account for variations in uniforms as there are over 400 different jobs at the plant. Tyson went on to say that the case, as it currently stands, lumps together those who may have taken much longer than the average person with those who took much less time, even including some employees who never even missed out on wages. And, according to the current lineup of justices, this may be grounds to disallow class certification.

There has been a growing stigma that class actions are being used to shake down large corporations for the benefit of attorneys, and bolstering settlement funds with uninjured class members could be seen as reinforcing the stereotype. Class actions are a necessary part of American litigation: they give the consumer a legal defense against exploitation from big companies, but many believe that they have spiraled out of control. A majority of the justices share this same view and have been using their power to put class actions back in their place.

Twice in the last several years, our Supreme Court has made monumental rulings that greatly affected the class certification process. The decisions in both Wal-Mart v. Dukes and Comcast v. Behrend set strict standards when it comes to class actions. Wal-Mart v. Dukes got the ball rolling initially when it was decided that a group of 1.5 million female Wal-Mart employees could not be given class certification in a case alleging gender discrimination. Comcast v. Behrend followed similarly and both cases have been cited numerous times from there on out, showing that, in order for a class to be certified or upheld at the hands of these justices, it must be shown that all potential class members suffered the same injury. And it doesn’t look like the Supreme Court is going to do anything to backtrack on these decisions anytime soon.

Simply put, while we can never be certain how the court will rule, things don’t look good for Tyson employees.