Dive Brief:
- The Supreme Court ruled against Tyson Foods in a class action lawsuit regarding employees demanding overtime pay at an Iowa pork processing plant. This was for time spent donning and removing protective equipment before and after their shifts. The Supreme Court upheld the lower courts' use of statistical, or representative, estimates to determine liability in multiparty cases filed against companies.
- A federal jury and the Eighth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had ruled in favor of the workers, which resulted in $5.8 million in damages fined to Tyson. Tyson appealed the case to the Supreme Court.
- Ruling in favor of Tyson's argument "would make little sense," Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote, speaking for the court. The use of statistical samples varies case by case depending on the specific facts involved and how reliable the analysis is, and in many instances, representative evidence is "the only practicable means to collect and present relevant data," he said.
Dive Insight:
Many companies hoped the Supreme Court would rule in favor of Tyson, which could have limited future class-action lawsuits. For the food industry, an industry where class-action lawsuits are common, this decision was disappointing.
Similar employee pay cases have popped up across the industry. Tyson won its appeal in a $24 million Nebraska class-action employee lawsuit in August, a reversal granted by the same court of appeals that denied Tyson's appeal in the Iowa case. Earlier this month, the Wisconsin Supreme Court ordered Hormel to pay nearly $200,000 in back wages after it upheld a 2014 ruling by a Rock County judge.
Outcomes have been mixed in these cases. With no precedent to limit the use of statistical or representative evidence going forward means fewer barriers for future class-action lawsuits.