U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit – Labor & Employment – Piece-Rate Employee – North Carolina Wage and Hour Act

The district court correctly found that Plaintiff was a piece-rate employee and made no reversible error by dismissing the North Carolina Wage and Hour Act (NCWHA) and the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) claims.

We affirmed the district court’s dismissal of all claims.

Plaintiff, on behalf of himself and other similarly situated employees, sued Butterball, LLC, a leading turkey producer, seeking payment of unpaid wages under the NCWHA and the FLSA. The district court dismissed the NCWHA claims and granted summary judgment for Butterball on the FLSA claim. Pertinently, the district court found Plaintiff was a piece-rate employee rather than an hourly employee, which played a significant role in its conclusion that Butterball did not shortchange its turkey loaders’ pay.

Plaintiff initially filed suit claiming he was entitled to hourly pay and overtime under NCWHA and FLSA. The district court dismissed his first amended complaint, noting Plaintiff had previously admitted he was informed he would be paid under a piece-rate system. He later filed a second amended complaint, claiming he was promised hourly pay at a regular rate plus overtime. The court found his NCWHA claims for unpaid wages and notice violations either duplicative of his FLSA claims or unsupported and dismissed them. The court also conditionally certified the FLSA collective action and, after discovery, granted Butterball summary judgment on the FLSA claim, finding Plaintiff was properly classified as a piece-rate employee.

The Fourth Circuit reviewed the NCWHA claims first. Plaintiff’s attempt to recover overtime pay under the NCWHA failed because the statute’s overtime provisions are preempted by the FLSA, which provides the exclusive remedy for federally covered employees. His NCWHA payday claim for promised hourly wages was also dismissed because discovery confirmed that he was compensated based on a piece-rate system. Although Plaintiff alleged that his pay stub indicated an hourly rate slightly different from the promised rate, the court found this discrepancy harmless, as the offer letter, paystubs, and testimony of other employees confirmed the piece-rate structure. Similarly, his NCWHA notice claim failed because Butterball provided adequate notice of wages through the signed offer letter and paystubs.

Regarding FLSA claims, the Court concluded that Butterball properly calculated Plaintiff’s overtime as a piece-rate employee. The FLSA allows overtime calculations based on total weekly earnings divided by total hours worked to determine a regular hourly rate, with overtime paid at half that rate for hours exceeding 40 per week. Plaintiff argued that Butterball misapplied the workweek, shifted hours, and failed to pay for pre-shift duties. The Court rejected these claims, noting that his own allegations confirmed a Sunday-to-Saturday workweek, there was no evidence of improperly shifted hours, and he did not personally perform the pre-shift tasks claimed by other opt-in plaintiffs. The Court also held that the piece-rate system properly compensated for all hours worked, including nonproductive time, and that there was no basis to require time-and-a-half overtime beyond what Butterball calculated.

Affirmed.

Figueroa v. Butterball LLC (Lawyers Weekly No. 001-017-26, 22 pp.) (DeAndrea Gist Benjamin, J.) Appealed from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh (James C. Dever III, J.) ARGUED: Gilda Adriana Hernandez, LAW OFFICES OF GILDA A. HERNANDEZ, PLLC, Cary, North Carolina, for Appellant. Scott David Anderson, WOMBLE BOND DICKINSON (US) LLP, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. ON BRIEF: Matthew S. Marlowe, Hannah B. Simmons, LAW OFFICES OF GILDA A. HERNANDEZ, PLLC, Cary, North Carolina, for Appellant. Hayden J. Silver, III, WOMBLE BOND DICKINSON (US) LLP, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit