United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division
JUDITH PERRY, ERIN LANE, SUHAIMA CHOUDHURY, and AIMEE DOOLING, Plaintiffs,
RANDSTAD GENERAL PARTNER (US) LLC, Defendant.
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN
PART DEFENDANT'S RENEWED MOTION FOR SUMMARY
Corbett O'Meara United States District Judge
the court is Defendant Randstad General Partner (US)
LLC's renewed motion for summary judgment, filed March 1,
2018, which has been fully briefed. For the reasons explained
below, Defendant's motion is granted in part and denied
Judith Perry, Aimee Dooling, and Erin Lane claim that they
were mis-classified as exempt from the overtime requirements
of the Fair Labor Standards Act by their former employer,
Randstad General Partner (US), LLC (“Randstad”).
Randstad is a staffing company that recruits employees or
“talent” for its clients. Plaintiffs worked for
Randstad at its branch in Troy, Michigan, which focuses on
recruiting and placing temporary employees in various office
and administrative positions.
held several different positions while they worked at
Randstad, including Talent Acquisition Specialist, Account
Manager, and Staffing Consultant. Plaintiffs' base
salaries ranged from $32, 000 to $48, 125, and they were also
eligible for commissions and bonuses. Randstad classified
Perry, Dooling, and Lane as exempt from the FLSA overtime
granting Defendant's first motion for summary judgment,
the court agreed that Plaintiffs were exempt and found that
they met the requirements of the administrative exemption
while working as Account Managers, Assistant Branch Manager,
and Staffing Consultants. Although Defendant also argued that
Plaintiffs were exempt under the outside sales and
combination exemptions, the court did not reach those
arguments. On appeal, the Sixth Circuit affirmed in part and
reversed in part, finding that Dooling and Perry's duties
as Staffing Consultants did not satisfy the administrative
exemption. Defendant reasserts its argument that the work
performed by Perry and Dooling as Staffing Consultants
satisfies the outside sales and combination
exemptions. Defendant also contends that the duties
performed by Lane as a Talent Acquisition Specialist
qualified her for the administrative exemption.
Staffing Consultants, Perry and Dooling were responsible for
selling Randstad's talent placement services to clients
and then recruiting candidates to fill
positions. Although the Sixth Circuit found that
Perry and Dooling engaged in “matchmaking” duties
that fell within the administrative exemption, it determined
that such duties were not necessarily their
“primary” duties. Perry v. Randstad General
Partner (US) LLC, 876 F.3d 191, 212 (6th Cir.
2017). The court found that “a reasonable trier of fact
could find that Perry's and Dooling's primary duties
during their time as Staffing Consultants were their
non-exempt sales and routine recruiting tasks, not their
exempt matchmaking duties.” Id.
Sixth Circuit noted that Perry believed “her most
important duty as a Staffing Consultant was ‘selling
Randstad services.'” Id. at 200.
“Based upon the estimates of time spent on various
tasks Perry offered during her deposition, she spent at least
five hours per day on sales activities, perhaps more.”
Id. at 212. Dooling testified that her
“non-exempt sales duties took up ‘50 percent of
[her] time.' She spent the rest of her time on a mix of
exempt and non-exempt recruiting and matchmaking
duties.” Id. From Dooling's perspective,
“there wasn't one activity that was more important
over another. All of your responsibilities were
important.” Id. at 206.
to the Sixth Circuit,
Perry estimated that, as a Staffing Consultant, she spent two
hours or more per day “prospecting” - calling
clients and prospective clients about potential openings. She
spent about an hour each day visiting clients and prospective
clients in person. Perry spent about another 4.5 hours per
month taking clients and prospective clients of her choosing
out for meals. Perry also spent 2-3 hours per month at
networking events. It was not clear how the remainder of her
time was divided. . . . In practice, Perry typically worked
from 7:00 a.m. to 5:30 or 6:00 p.m. and ate lunch at her
desk. She worked some Saturdays and averaged 55 hours per
Perry, 876 F.3d at 202. Once a client hired Randstad
to fill a position, Perry would recruit appropriate
candidates to interview and hire. See Id. at 201.
Perry would also check in on placements to ensure that the
relationship was working. Id. 202.
Staffing Consultant, Dooling was “required to sell 50
percent of the time as well as recruit 50 percent of the
time.” Id. at 205.
Selling meant “going out and finding new business,
” including “lots of phone calls, lots of
cold-calling” and prospective client visits, if she was
able to set them up. Dooling was also responsible for sending
out “lots of marketing material, ” much of which
Randstad required her to hand-address or add a personal note
to. She was required to reach out to prospective clients in
her assigned territory that met Randstad's criteria. She
used Randstad's database of potential contacts, and also
conducted internet research and did cold calls to add new
prospective clients to the database herself. Dooling also
knocked on the doors of potential clients several times per
month; when she did so, she would be away from the office for
approximately half a day.
Perry, 876 F.3d at 205.
began working for Today's Office Professionals in April
2010 as a staffing consultant. Today's Office
Professionals was purchased by Randstad in December 2011, at
which time Lane's title became Talent Acquisition
Specialist. Randstad does not classify Talent Acquisition
Specialists as exempt. Randstad argues, however, that
although Lane was a Talent Acquisition Specialist, she
actually performed the same duties as an ...