Romulus v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc.: Meal Periods, Ascertainability, and the Importance of Removal

by Pierce Atwood LLP

In Romulus v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc., five former Shift Supervisors brought a putative class action against CVS under the Massachusetts Wage Act, contending they were required to work through their unpaid breaks.  Specifically, the plaintiffs alleged that they were required to remain in the store during their breaks when they were the only managerial employees on duty, were interrupted to handle transactions when necessary, and were nonetheless not paid for their time.  In a 12-page opinion issued last week, United States District Judge Rya Zobel denied the plaintiffs’ request for class certification, finding they failed to satisfy the requirements of commonality and predominance under Rule 23.

Although CVS policy required a member of management to be present in the store at all times during operating hours, the policy also provided employees with one unpaid 30-minute meal break for each six or eight-hour shift, and instructed employees that, in the event their meal period was interrupted, they should notify their manager to ensure they were paid for their time. The court noted that the policies, on their faces, neither required Shift Supervisors to remain on-site during their breaks, nor required them to take their breaks when they were the only members of management present.  There was evidence that at least one of the named plaintiffs took his meal break at noon each day, when he was the only member of management present, even though the store manager typically arrived at the store shortly thereafter.  Another plaintiff, in contrast, was allegedly the only managerial employee present during her shifts and therefore could not choose to take her break at another time.

The court further noted that the plaintiffs’ testimony regarding whether they were required to clock out for meal breaks that were interrupted or spent in the store varied.  For example, one plaintiff testified that she did not always clock out for her breaks, but that her manager would manually adjust her time card to include the break.  Another testified that she was directed to clock-out for meal breaks she was required to spend in the store and understood that was the policy.

Because the plaintiffs were not contending that any individual policy was illegal on its face, but rather that the policies had been implemented in an unlawful manner, and in light of the plaintiff’s various circumstances, the court held that the plaintiff’s evidence was insufficient to establish commonality under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a)(2), citing the seminal Supreme Court decision of Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes.  Similarly, because the factual issues required individualized inquiries, the court found that the plaintiffs failed to satisfy the Rule 23(b)(3) predominance requirement.

Like the Supreme Court’s decision in Wal-Mart, the district court’s decision demonstrates the hurdles plaintiffs face when seeking to certify a wage and hour class based not on the defendant’s uniform corporate policies, but on allegations that the defendant’s practices deviated from the written policies, especially when there is evidence that the experiences of the employees subject to the complained-of practices varied. Two other aspects of the court’s decision and the case’s history are worth noting.

First, the court began its analysis by addressing the parties’ positions about whether the plaintiffs had met Rule 23’s implied requirement of showing that the proposed classes are ascertainable. Plaintiffs argued that the ascertainability requirement was met because whether a Shift Supervisor was in the store during an unpaid break when no other managerial employee was present could be decided based on objective criteria. CVS apparently argued, as defendants often do, that ascertaining who is in the class not only must be based on objective criteria, but also must be administratively feasible. The court quoted language from the First Circuit’s decision in In re Nexium Antitrust Litigation in support of the question whether “prior to judgment, it will be possible to establish a mechanism for distinguishing the injured from the uninjured class members,” but said it did not need to decide the question because the lack of commonality and predominance disposed of the class certification motion. Thus, although the court clearly suggested that something more than the presence of objective criteria is needed to satisfy ascertainability, its decision provides little guidance concerning how to apply the administrative feasibility standard.

Second, the case demonstrates the importance of CAFA removal, a procedure so important to the parties that they fought an appeal over it before the case was remanded for the proceedings that led to last week’s order denying class certification. In Salvas v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court reversed a lower court’s ruling decertifying a meal period and rest break case. No doubt, the plaintiffs in the CVS case hoped to stay in state court so they could attempt to capitalize on the SJC’s 2008 decision. The defendant’s removal of the decision to federal court may have been critical in defeating class certification.

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Pierce Atwood LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Pierce Atwood LLP

Pierce Atwood LLP on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.


JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at:

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.