## Facts

- Clarence W. Heath and over 100 similarly situated workers served as “chicken catchers,” traveling in crews to contract farms to capture live chickens and load them for transport to Perdue processing plants.
- Perdue Farms, Inc. operated an integrated poultry business: it hatched chicks, placed them with independent contract farmers to raise under Perdue specifications, and retained ownership of the birds throughout.
- Catching crews typically included multiple catchers plus support roles (e.g., house man, forklift driver, crew leader).
- Perdue directed the live-haul operation through a training/manual system, controlled scheduling and performance expectations, and provided ongoing oversight and feedback.
- Perdue owned and maintained the principal equipment used for catching and loading; crew leaders and workers invested little by comparison.
- The work required little specialized skill, and many catchers had long-term, often exclusive relationships with Perdue.
- Catchers regularly worked more than 40 hours per week but were not paid overtime.
- Perdue asserted the catchers were independent contractors (employed, if at all, by crew leaders) and alternatively claimed they were exempt from overtime as agricultural laborers under federal law and within Maryland’s “first processing” exemption.
- Plaintiffs alleged the overtime violations were willful, seeking the longer federal limitations period, and moved to join an additional catcher and a group of catchers associated with another Perdue facility.

## Issues

1. Whether, under the FLSA and Maryland wage law, the chicken catchers were Perdue’s employees (including as joint employees with crew leaders) rather than independent contractors.
2. Whether the catchers were exempt from FLSA overtime as “agricultural” employees under 29 U.S.C. § 213(b)(12).
3. Whether Maryland’s “first processing” overtime exemption applied to the catching and loading work performed on farms and in transit.
4. Whether Perdue’s failure to pay overtime was willful under the FLSA, extending the limitations period to three years.
5. Whether to allow joinder of (a) an additional Salisbury catcher and (b) catchers associated with Perdue’s Milford, Delaware facility.

## Decision

- Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment on liability was granted; Perdue’s cross-motion was denied.
- Perdue was held to be an employer of the chicken catchers under the FLSA and Maryland law based on the economic reality of the relationship.
- The FLSA agricultural exemption did not apply to the chicken catchers’ live-haul catching and loading work.
- Maryland’s “first processing” exemption did not apply to this off-site, pre-plant activity.
- Perdue’s FLSA violations were willful, permitting application of the three-year limitations period.
- Joinder of Oliver Hazzard (a Salisbury catcher) was granted; joinder/notice as to the Milford, Delaware catchers was denied.

## Legal Principles

- FLSA employment status turns on the “economic reality” of the relationship, not contractual labels, commonly assessed through factors including control, profit/loss opportunity, relative investment, skill, permanence, and whether the work is integral to the business.
- A company may be a joint employer where it meaningfully controls working conditions and economic aspects of the job (including supervision, equipment, pay arrangements, and hiring/firing influence), even if an intermediary is present.
- The FLSA agricultural overtime exemption is construed narrowly and does not cover live-haul poultry catching/loading performed as part of an integrated commercial processing chain rather than traditional farming.
- Maryland’s “first processing” overtime exemption does not extend to pre-plant catching and loading performed at contract farms and during transport.
- An FLSA violation is willful if the employer knew, or showed reckless disregard for whether, its conduct was prohibited; willfulness triggers a three-year limitations period.

## Conclusion

The court held that Perdue’s chicken catchers were employees entitled to overtime under federal and Maryland law, rejecting independent-contractor and exemption defenses, finding the overtime violations willful, and allowing limited joinder while excluding a separate facility’s workers from the case.


Heath v. Perdue Farms, Inc., 87 F. Supp. 2d 452 (D. Md. 2000)