Federal courts almost never grant motions for reconsideration — making this Double D Tong overtime lawsuit a remarkable example of persistent advocacy. In Minyard v. Double D Tong, Inc., No. 7:16-cv-00313-RAJ (W.D. Tex.), the Siegel Law Group persuaded the court to reverse its own ruling and expand the FLSA conditional certification to include all non-exempt casing workers — not just two job titles. The firm has recovered $100M+ for workers and filed 100+ federal overtime lawsuits challenging unpaid overtime in the oil and gas industry.
The case produced two rulings in quick succession. On February 27, 2017, Judge Robert A. Junell granted conditional certification but limited the collective to only Field Hands and Crew Pushers. Workers in other non-exempt casing positions were excluded despite being subject to the same pay policies and the same overtime denial.
On March 21, 2017 — less than a month later — Judge Junell granted reconsideration and expanded the conditional certification to include all non-exempt casing workers. The court's reasoning was direct: "FLSA violations don't turn on the nature of work performed but on the compensation scheme." This holding cut through the employer's attempt to divide workers by job title and instead focused on the pay policy that applied to all of them.
Motions for reconsideration succeed in only a small fraction of cases. Courts view them skeptically, and judges rarely appreciate being asked to revisit decisions. The success here reinforces a critical principle: overtime lawsuits under the FLSA should focus on employer conduct — specifically, the compensation scheme — not worker-by-worker job duty comparisons. When an employer adopts a uniform pay policy that violates overtime law, every worker harmed by that policy should have the opportunity to join the case.
Under the FLSA, the relevant question for conditional certification is whether workers are "similarly situated" — and the Siegel Law Group argued that similarity should be measured by the employer's pay practices, not by individual job titles. The court agreed, recognizing that if the employer paid all its casing workers the same way — and that method denied them overtime — then all those workers belonged in the same collective action.
The Siegel Law Group took the calculated risk of filing the reconsideration motion because the legal principle was too important to concede. This case demonstrates the firm's willingness to push for the right result at every stage of litigation.
If you are an oilfield casing worker — regardless of your specific job title — and you were denied overtime under the same pay policy as your coworkers, you may be able to join a collective action challenging that policy. The Siegel Law Group concentrates in oilfield overtime cases and has a proven track record of expanding collective actions to include all affected workers.
A motion for reconsideration asks the court to revisit and change a ruling it has already made. These motions are rarely granted — courts generally require the moving party to show a clear error of law or fact, or new evidence that was not previously available. Success on reconsideration is considered a significant litigation achievement.
The court found that FLSA violations turn on the employer's compensation scheme, not the nature of work performed. Because all non-exempt casing workers were subject to the same pay policy that denied overtime, they all belonged in the same collective action — regardless of their specific job titles.
An FLSA collective action allows similarly situated workers to join together in one lawsuit. The process begins with conditional certification, where the court authorizes notice to potential opt-in plaintiffs. Workers then have a set period to join. After the opt-in period, the employer may challenge the collective at the decertification stage.
Yes. As this ruling demonstrates, FLSA collective actions focus on the employer's pay practices, not individual job titles. If you were subject to the same compensation scheme that denied overtime, you may be similarly situated to the named plaintiffs regardless of your title.
An expanded conditional certification means notice can be sent to a broader group of workers, giving more people the opportunity to opt in and pursue their overtime claims. The case then proceeds through discovery and toward trial or settlement.
The Siegel Law Group is a national overtime and wage law firm devoted entirely to representing workers denied overtime pay. Where many firms include wage cases as a small part of a broader employment practice, the Siegel Law Group has built its entire practice around overtime litigation — and the results reflect that commitment: $100M+ recovered for workers, 50+ class and collective action certifications, and 100+ federal lawsuits filed in 27+ federal courts nationwide. Founding attorney Jack Siegel is a Bloomberg BNA contributing author on wage and hour law.
Free consultation. Contingency fee — no fee unless we win.
Phone: (214) 790-4454 | Email: [email protected]
Past results do not guarantee future outcomes. This website contains attorney advertising.
Search by company or industry to see overtime case activity.
Case information shown is from public court filings and approved settlements. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
