Employers have been arguing for years that it is impermissible ?for ?a ?court ?to ?certify? a ?state ?law wage and hour class action and a federal FLSA collective action. ?The Nevada district judge in this case accepted that argument but the Ninth Circuit reversed. ?The Ninth Circuit noted that not a single circuit had held there is a conflict between having an ?FLSA ?collective? action ?and ?state? law ?class action in the same case.? ?The Ninth Circuit recognized the FLSA permits more protective state laws, which including laws allowing class actions. It makes no difference that the size of the FLSA collective action is likely to be smaller than the state? law ?class.?? ?The ?court ?relied ?on ?the? Class Action Fairness Act as support for its reasoning.

On the merits, the panel held that the time the employees spent undergoing security screenings to prevent theft was compensable time under the FLSA, reversing the district court.?? The panel agreed? with the district court that the workers had no claim for shortened lunch periods under the FLSA.?? Walking to the lunchroom did not constitute compensable time.?? Interruption of a meal break does not violate the FLSA. ?However, being on call during the meal break might require compensation. ?Unlike Washington, Nevada law does not provide for a private right of action to enforce meal breaks.

Busk v. Integrity Staffing Solutions, 713 F.3d 525 (9th???? Cir.? ?4/12/2013)? ?(Thomas,? ?Farris,? ?N.R. Smith).