COLLINS, STEPHEN M., PEOPLE v

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that FLSA protection usually applies where “the employee’s complaint, though general, was readily recognizable as an objection that a particular employment practice regarding wages or hours was illegal”
• observing that, in cases finding employees' generalized complaints to constitute protected expression, the complaints were \readily recognizable as an objection that a particular employment practice regarding wages or hours was illegal\
• noting that while employee’s failure to mention the FLSA in her complaints was “not necessarily fatal,” the complaints were insufficient because they merely alleged the employer was violating the law without offering any specificity as to how
• “The FLSA requires employers to pay minimum wages and overtime compensation to nonexempt—i.e., hourly—employees.” (citing 29 U.S.C. §§ 206–07)
• plaintiff must have an “objectively reasonable” and “good-faith belief” that the conduct at issue violated the FLSA
• a former employee's assertion to an employer that its conduct was \against federal law\ was too vague to give the employer fair notice that she was asserting her FLSA rights

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).