## Facts

- Darnell Greathouse worked as a security guard for JHS Security Inc. for just over five years.
- He alleged recurring wage-and-hour problems, including late or missing pay and improper payroll deductions.
- By October 2011, he had not received a paycheck in several months.
- Greathouse orally complained to company president/co-owner Melvin Wilcox that he was not being paid what he was owed.
- Greathouse alleged Wilcox responded, “I’ll pay you when I feel like it,” drew a gun, and pointed it at him.
- Greathouse understood the incident to end his employment and did not return to work.
- Greathouse sued JHS Security and Wilcox for FLSA wage violations, FLSA retaliation, and New York labor-law violations.
- Defendants defaulted; the district court awarded wage damages but denied retaliation relief based on circuit precedent treating internal oral complaints as outside FLSA § 215(a)(3).

## Issues

1. Whether FLSA § 215(a)(3) protects an employee’s internal oral complaint to an employer, or instead requires a written complaint filed with a government agency.
2. Whether Greathouse’s oral wage complaint could constitute protected activity supporting an FLSA retaliation claim.

## Decision

- The Second Circuit vacated the denial of relief on the FLSA retaliation claim and remanded for further proceedings.
- The court overruled prior circuit precedent to the extent it required a written complaint and/or a complaint filed with a government agency.
- The court held that an oral complaint to an employer may satisfy § 215(a)(3) if it is sufficiently clear and detailed, in context, to put a reasonable employer on notice that the employee is asserting FLSA-protected rights.
- Applying that standard, the court concluded Greathouse’s allegations plausibly established protected activity, an adverse action effectively ending employment, and a causal link because the alleged threat occurred immediately after the complaint.

## Legal Principles

- Under FLSA § 215(a)(3), “filed any complaint” includes oral as well as written complaints.
- A complaint may be made internally to an employer, not only to a governmental agency, if it is sufficiently clear and detailed for a reasonable employer to understand it as an assertion of FLSA rights and a request for their protection.
- Circuit precedent imposing a “formal” requirement—treated as a written, agency-filed complaint—was rejected as inconsistent with the statute’s text and enforcement purpose and with Supreme Court guidance recognizing oral complaints.
- Agency interpretations supporting coverage of internal complaints may be given persuasive weight in construing § 215(a)(3).

## Conclusion

The Second Circuit held that an employee can bring an FLSA retaliation claim based on a clear, internal oral complaint to the employer about wage violations, vacated the judgment denying retaliation relief, and remanded for consideration of that claim under the clarified standard.


Greathouse v. JHS Sec., Inc., 784 F.3d 105 (2d Cir. 2015)