On April 13, 2011, a federal district court judge in Illinois held, in Mullins v. Target Corp., that “investigators” employed by Target Corporation qualified for the administrative exemption to the FLSA. Accordingly, the court dismissed a putative class action filed against Target by those investigators.

Plaintiff previously worked for Target as an investigator. Her job duties included conducting investigations of fraud and theft occurring at Target’s retail stores in Chicago and Indiana. The employee brought an action individually, and on behalf of all other Target investigators, alleging that she and her fellow investigators were misclassified as exempt and therefore should have been paid overtime.

Target moved for summary judgment, arguing that the employee qualified for the administrative exemption to the FLSA. In response, the employee argued, among other things, that her work was not directly related to assisting with Target’s general business operations and that she was heavily supervised and therefore did not exercise sufficient discretion and independent judgment to qualify for the exemption.

The court ultimately concluded that investigators “serviced Target’s retail operations by investigating and preventing theft and fraud” and that, although she was supervised and trained in her duties, the employee exercised professional judgment in selecting cases and developing strategies for carrying out subsequent investigations. Further, the court concluded that the employee exercised discretion and independent judgment with regard to matters of significance because her investigations had the potential to result in the recovery of substantial Target assets.

Based on these findings, the court held that there was no genuine issue as to whether the employee was an exempt administrative employee and entered summary judgment for Target. Having granted summary judgment, the court also denied the plaintiff’s motion to certify the case as a collective action.

Photo credit: Homegrown Media