Trudy WALTON, Et Al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. UNITED CONSUMERS CLUB, INCORPORATED, Defendant-Appellant

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that § 207(i) “is not an af- firmative defense,” but rather, “a method of complying with the [FLSA]”
• noting that the FLSA bans private settlements about pay disputes to prevent parties from establishing “sub-minimum wages”
• noting that \it is unlikely that Congress meant to require employers to pay overtime in the lean weeks when the fat weeks more than make up\
• noting that “[s]ection 11(c) of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 211(c), requires every employer to keep an accurate record of the hours worked by each employee”
• noting that the supervision of settlements envisioned by the FLSA calls for settlement approval only when “something close to full payment of the wages and overtime due” is achieved in the agreement
• remarking that the FLSA has “bann[ed] private settlements of disputes about pay”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).