Chacon v. Black Star Energy — Pump Hands Certified

Case at a glance

Court: U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas
Case: Chacon v. Black Star Energy Services, LLC, No. 7:15-cv-00198 (docket)
Workers: Pump Hands and Operators
Pay plan: Salary plus bonus, as the order describes the complaint
Claims: Unpaid overtime under the Fair Labor Standards Act
Key ruling: Certified as a collective action (sworn: Siegel Decl. ¶ 13(b), filed in Weeks v. Matrix Absence Mgmt., No. 2:20-cv-00884 (D. Ariz. July 6, 2022))
Our role: Jack Siegel, counsel of record for the workers

Oilfield Pump Hand Overtime Lawsuit: Black Star Energy Pump Hands and Operators Conditionally Certified

On February 16, 2016, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas granted conditional certification of an FLSA collective action of Pump Hands and Operators in Chacon v. Black Star Energy Services, L.L.C., No. MO:15-CV-00198-RAJ. In this oilfield pump hand overtime lawsuit, the court acted on the parties’ joint stipulation. It also approved notice by mail and email and ordered the notice posted at the company’s shops. Jack Siegel served as lead counsel for the workers.

What the Court Ruled

Senior United States District Judge Robert A. Junell signed the Order Granting Conditional Certification of Collective Action on February 16, 2016. That was the same day the parties filed their joint stipulation. The defendants were Black Star Energy Services, L.L.C., formerly known as Man Lift Rentals, L.L.C., and an individual defendant.

The parties stipulated that the group was similarly situated to the plaintiffs for purposes of conditional certification. The court wrote: “Pursuant to the Parties’ Joint Stipulation and the substantial allegations raised in Plaintiffs’ Complaint, conditional certification of the collective action is hereby GRANTED.”

The court then ordered that this definition of the collective be used: “All current and former Pump Hands and/or Operators employed by Black Star Energy Services (formerly known as Man Lift Rentals) and Kevin Blackwood between February 2013, and the present.” It ordered the workers to file a revised notice using that definition within three business days.

Notice terms. Under the order:

The defendants had ten (10) business days to give the workers’ lawyers names, last known addresses, email addresses, and phone numbers. Phone numbers could be used only to verify mail or email addresses, not to solicit.
Notice could go by mail and/or email for sixty (60) days from the date the defendants turned over the list. Workers had until the end of that period to mail, email, or fax a consent form.
Within five days after the workers’ lawyers reported sending notice, the defendants had to post the notice at each branch, location, or shop that employed these workers. Postings had to be in readily visible, prominent places, and the defendants had to certify them in writing.

Why This Matters

The order described the claim in the workers’ own complaint. According to the order, the complaint covered current and former Mixing Plant Employees whose primary duty was to transport, monitor, and operate chemical mixing equipment. It said those workers were paid a salary plus bonus and worked more than 40 hours per week. The proposed notice the parties filed said the workers did not receive overtime pay for hours over 40.

The parties’ stipulation described the workers by their duties — Pump Hands and Operators who set up, operated, and monitored the mixing plant equipment. The court’s order, however, defined the collective by job title: current and former Pump Hands and/or Operators employed between February 2013 and the date of the order.

Shop posting mattered for a field crew, because it gave workers another way to see the notice at work. This was an agreed order, so it was not a contested win and not a finding that the defendants broke the law.

The Legal Background

The Fair Labor Standards Act requires time and a half for hours over 40 in a workweek unless an exemption applies. As general information, a salary alone does not make a worker exempt, because the white-collar exemptions also require specific duties. For a non-exempt worker, non-discretionary bonuses generally must be included when the overtime rate is figured. Learn more about salaried vs. hourly pay and overtime.

In this 2016 order, the court said most courts within the Fifth Circuit had adopted a two-step approach. The first step, the notice stage, used what the court, quoting Fifth Circuit precedent, called a “fairly lenient standard” for conditional certification. Some federal appeals courts have since changed this approach — the Fifth Circuit in Swales v. KLLM Transport Services (2021) and the Sixth Circuit in Clark v. A&L Homecare & Training Center (2023). Swales now governs federal courts in Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi.

What This Means for Workers

This page describes a 2016 court order. The time to join that collective was set by the court in that case. If you have worked in a similar role, the Siegel Law Group can evaluate your own claims.

Have you worked as a pump hand, operator, or mixing plant worker in the oilfield? Were you paid a salary plus a bonus, and did you often work more than 40 hours a week without overtime? A lawyer can review how you were paid.

Contact the Siegel Law Group for a free consultation.

Frequently Asked Questions

Do pump hands paid a salary plus bonus get overtime?

Some do, depending on the job. Earning a salary is not enough on its own to make an oilfield employee exempt, and hands who run and monitor field equipment generally fall outside the white-collar exemptions. A non-exempt pump hand is owed overtime for hours past forty, and any non-discretionary bonus generally must be included in the rate used to calculate it.

Why would a court make an oilfield company post an overtime lawsuit notice?

Posting gives crews who move often another chance to learn about a case. In Chacon v. Black Star Energy Services, the court required the company to put the notice up at every branch, location, and shop where these workers were employed, in prominent places all employees could reach. The company then had to certify the postings to the court in writing.

Who could join the Black Star Energy overtime lawsuit?

The 2016 order defined the collective as current and former Pump Hands and/or Operators employed by Black Star Energy Services, formerly Man Lift Rentals, and an individual defendant between February 2013 and the present, in the order’s words. Joining depended on a sixty-day window that ran from when the company turned over its worker list. A pump hand in a similar job today needs a fresh look at his or her own claim.

How long do oilfield pump hands have to bring an overtime claim?

Federal overtime claims generally must be filed within two years after each short payday, or within three years when the violation was willful (29 U.S.C. § 255(a)). Once a collective action is under way, a pump hand is generally not treated as having sued until the day his or her written, signed consent is filed with the court (29 U.S.C. § 256(b)). See how overtime claim deadlines work.

Did you do this job somewhere else? Tell us about it.

If you did this kind of work for another employer and weren't paid overtime for hours over 40, tell us your job title, your employer and the state you worked in. We'll tell you plainly whether we think you have a case. Federal law makes it illegal to retaliate against you for asking.

Tell us about it →

About Siegel Law Group

Siegel Law Group PLLC concentrates in unpaid overtime cases under the FLSA and state wage laws. The firm has filed more than 100 federal overtime cases, obtained 50+ class and collective certifications in 20 federal judicial districts across 15 states, and recovered more than $100 million for workers. It has never represented an employer in a wage case. Free consultation. Contingency fee: we advance case costs, and they are repaid from any recovery. No recovery, no fee and no costs. Phone: (214) 790-4454 | Email: [email protected]

These are results in other people's cases. Every case depends on its own facts and law. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. This website contains attorney advertising.

Attorney responsible: Jack L. Siegel, Siegel Law Group PLLC, Dallas, Texas.