Strategy for Defeating Class Certification in Wage and Hour Class Actions
A California Court of Appeal recently approved of a strategy by an employer to defeat class certification in a wage and hour class action for meal and rest breaks. It is a common belief that class actions are won or lost at the class certification stage. However, a recent case shows the battle is not over after the class plaintiffs’ first motion to certify class claims.
In Joanne Allison, et al. v. Dignity Health, 112 Cal. App. 5th 192 (2025), the plaintiff was a former registered nurse with Dignity Health. She filed suit alleging class claims for unpaid work, meal period and rest break violations, as well as derivative claims. At issue on appeal were the meal and rest period claims.
Allison filed a motion for class certification on behalf of nurses who worked at three Dignity hospitals. To support her motion, she submitted evidence from an expert witness showing that “over 70 percent of relevant shifts had a noncompliant meal period with an unpaid premium.” Further, Dignity placed the burden on the nurses to self-report missed meals creating a common question for class litigation. To support her claim regarding rest periods, Allison presented evidence that Dignity required nurses to carry electronic devices to communicate regarding work matters, even when on a break. Allison’s expert evidence showed that “nearly 70% of employees” used one of these devices during their shifts.
The trial court granted Allison’s motion and certified class claims for noncompliant meal and rest periods. The parties engaged in nineteen months of discovery on class issues. Dignity Health then filed a motion to decertify the class on the grounds the evidence showed that common questions did not predominate for class members. According to Dignity, testimony from class members revealed a “wide variation of relevant experiences.” Some nurses knowingly chose to skip breaks. One admitted to clocking in early at times. One nurse said she sometimes skipped breaks and left early instead. Most agreed their timesheets were not “entirely reliable” representations of their actual time worked. Based on this evidence, Dignity argued that “irreconcilable conflicts permeated the class.”
The trial granted the motion and decertified the class. According to the court, the newly presented evidence of conflicts between different employees’ claims were sufficient to grant the motion. In addition, the court criticized the survey evidence and trial plan presented by the plaintiff. Finally, an opinion letter from the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement raised doubts about the viability of the allegations related to the use of communications devices by healthcare providers. The Court of Appeal upheld the decision of the trial court, keeping the class decertified.
The Allison case shows the case is not necessarily lost if the plaintiff wins the certification motion. Post-motion discovery may provide new grounds for decertifying the class. Employers faced with wage and hour class actions should be mindful of all tools available to defeat class claims.
A copy of the case can be found here.
This communication may be considered advertising in some jurisdictions. It is intended to provide general information about legal developments and is not legal advice. If you have questions about the contents of this alert, please contact Kellen Crowe.