Employee Tries to Argue an Agreed-Upon Settlement Arrangement Regarding Overtime Pay

In the case of Sanders v. Connan’s Paint and Body Shop, LLC., Bobby Sanders filed a lawsuit claiming that his former employer, Connan’s Paint and Body Shop (Connan) had failed to provide overtime compensation. Additionally, Sanders also claimed that Connan had failed to pay him the minimum wage. While working for Connan, Sanders was paid on an hourly basis and received commissions.

Sanders claimed that neglecting to pay him overtime was a violation of the FLSA. Connan denied Sanders’ allegations and argued that Sanders was not entitled to overtime pay because he was a commissioned employee and was exempt from the FLSA’s overtime requirements.

The case went to trial and the jury found that Sanders was entitled to overtime. Sanders agreed to a settlement that awarded $3,750 at a rate of $250 per day for 15 days (the number of days Sanders claimed he was not compensated for overtime). One of the contingencies of the settlement was that Sanders had to withdraw the lawsuit.

Later on, Sanders attempted to argue that this settlement did not cover his FLSA claims. However, this argument is inconsistent with his agreement to the settlement which included his claims for overtime pay violations.

Therefore, the court continued with the motion to dismiss the case after Sanders had been awarded the agreed amount.

Key lessons from this case:
  • Both parties may negotiate and agree on a settlement that can include specific payment amounts from employers and withdrawal of the lawsuit on the employee’s side.
  • Employees or employers should adhere to the terms of a settlement agreement once executed. Any attempts to revive claims that were meant to be resolved can be unsuccessful.
  • An employee needs to know what the desired outcome of a lawsuit is to avoid dissatisfaction with settlement conditions.

If you want to know more about overtime regulations, read our guide on Indiana Overtime Laws.

See All