Abstract
The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) was meant to help level the playing field and help workers create a healthy working environment for themselves. However, today, due to the Supreme Court’s decision in Bristol-Myers Squibb v. Superior Court of California, San Francisco County and lower federal courts’ eagerness to expand personal jurisdiction, the FLSA is crumbling. Workers now face great difficulty in combining their claims in collective actions through the FLSA. When workers from many states do combine their claims, the workers often face dismissal from the action because not all claims have sufficient connections with the chosen litigation forum. Now instead of workers being able to stand together, these individuals must stand alone or in small groups within the state which has connections to their claims. This outcome undermines the very essence and intent of the FLSA and its collective action procedure.
Part I explores the history of the FLSA to determine Congress’s intent in passing the Act and explains the process behind creating a collective action under the FLSA. Part II explains the Supreme Court’s Bristol-Myers Squibb decision, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 4(k), how federal courts have misapplied Bristol-Myers Squibb, why Rule 4(k) does not apply to the FLSA, then how the federal courts should treat FLSA collective actions. Part III encourages state legislatures, the federal legislature, and the Supreme Court to all take steps to correct this ongoing issue.
Recommended Citation
Elijah Phillips,
The Crumbling Flsa Collective Action: How Bristol-Myers Squibb Shapes The Reach of Federal Wage Claims,
50
S. Ill. U. L.J.
153
(2025).
Available at:
https://opensiuc.lib.siu.edu/siulj/vol50/iss1/9