Magistrate Judge James Francis

 

Read Full- Text Decision

Plaintiff worked a “fit model” for Model Service LLC, doing business as MSA Models, from March 2013 through June 2014. Her lawsuit claiming violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and New York Labor Law (NYLL) alleged MSA misclassified her as an independent contractor when she should have been deemed an employee and compensated accordingly. Suit has been conditionally certified as a collective action on behalf of all fit models who worked for MSA at any time after September 2011. On competing motions to compel, the court denied defendants’ motion to compel plaintiff and any opt-in plaintiffs to disclose their tax returns. The court determined that a worker’s subjective perception of her classification as an employee or independent contractor was not pertinent to whether a worker is an employee pursuant to the FLSA’s “economic realities” test or the five factors relevant to determining control under the NYLL as articulated by Bynog v. Cipriani Grp. Inc., 1 N,Y. 3d 193. The court further ruled that defendants could not produce relevant documents only for exemplar plaintiffs unless they were prepared to stipulate that the exemplar plaintiffs were representative of the collective/putative class.

Magistrate Judge James Francis

 

Read Full- Text Decision

Plaintiff worked a “fit model” for Model Service LLC, doing business as MSA Models, from March 2013 through June 2014. Her lawsuit claiming violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and New York Labor Law (NYLL) alleged MSA misclassified her as an independent contractor when she should have been deemed an employee and compensated accordingly. Suit has been conditionally certified as a collective action on behalf of all fit models who worked for MSA at any time after September 2011. On competing motions to compel, the court denied defendants’ motion to compel plaintiff and any opt-in plaintiffs to disclose their tax returns. The court determined that a worker’s subjective perception of her classification as an employee or independent contractor was not pertinent to whether a worker is an employee pursuant to the FLSA’s “economic realities” test or the five factors relevant to determining control under the NYLL as articulated by Bynog v. Cipriani Grp. Inc. , 1 N,Y. 3d 193 . The court further ruled that defendants could not produce relevant documents only for exemplar plaintiffs unless they were prepared to stipulate that the exemplar plaintiffs were representative of the collective/putative class.