Summary of Ag Overtime Case

Jose Martinez-Cuevas, et al., v. DeRuyter Brothers Dairy, Inc., et al.

(as of June 10, 2019)

Former dairy workers (plaintiffs), represented by Columbia Legal Services, filed a lawsuit in
Yakima County Superior Court against DeRuyter Brothers Dairy (defendant) in a complicated
case with multiple allegations, including failure to provide meal and rest breaks, failure to pay
for tasks performed before and after shifts, and failure to pay overtime.
DeRuyter Brothers Dairy settled on the claims other than overtime, and the overtime issue was
specifically “carved out” in the settlement process. Sometime after the settlement, DeRuyter
Brothers Dairy sold the business, but they remain liable retroactively for unpaid overtime if the
courts rule against them.
The Washington State Dairy Federation and Washington Farm Bureau signed on as interveners
in the case.
Our role as intervenors is important because we are defending agriculture both now and in the
future. The primary goal of the DeRuyters is to limit any penalties against themselves. Those
two issues dovetail, but they are not necessarily the same goals.
Plaintiffs were unwilling to settle the case because they want a precedent-setting decision at
the State Supreme Court.
The plaintiffs allege that the statutory exemption from overtime pay in agriculture violates the
state constitution. Yakima County Superior Court Judge Michael McCarthy ruled on summary
judgment that plaintiffs do have a claim under the state constitution, but a trial would be
necessary to determine if the statutory exemption is reasonable and defensible. The judge also
suggested the case be appealed before the case goes to trial (called an interlocutory appeal).
Both sides appealed. Defendants appealed to the Court of Appeals in Spokane, while the
plaintiffs appealed to the State Supreme Court. The Supreme Court accepted the plaintiffs’
appeal.
Plaintiffs have filed their opening brief, arguing that a lack overtime pay in agriculture makes
the industry more dangerous to workers and that the overtime exemption has racist origins and
disproportionately and negatively impacts impoverished communities of color.
Defendants and intervenors have filed response briefs. Our attorney, Tim O’Connell, argued in
our intervenors’ brief that the ag overtime exemption does not grant a privilege or immunity
and that there are reasonable grounds for the statutory exemption.

Page 1 of 3
Funds to participate in this lawsuit on behalf of all of agriculture are being collected by the
Washington Agricultural Legal Foundation (WALF) and the Washington Farm Bureau Legal
Foundation.
Phase 1 of the case (Yakima Superior Court) reached our cap of $55,000. Our attorney has said
the next phase of appellate arguments, including briefings and oral arguments, at the Supreme
Court will cost $60,000.
The Washington Ag Legal Foundation (WALF) is a 501(c)(3) that is handling the contributions
and paying the legal bills. WALF has coordinated this effort to date, and WALF is asking
agriculture groups to help fund the interveners’ actions as the case moves forward.
If we lose the case, the costs to agriculture in past, present, and future wages will be
(conservatively and collectively) in the hundreds of millions of dollars.
The financial impacts differ with each crop and commodity, but in any week where an
employee works over 40 hours, the additional hours would be at 150% of regular wages.
During work weeks where employees work 7 days per week, 8 hours a day, that is a 14.3%
increase in weekly wages assuming $15/hour ($120 additional). For schedules where employees
are working seven 12-hour days (hops, dairy, some fruit harvest) assuming $15/hour, it would
be an additional $330/week, or a 26% increase.
Dairy farms with employees working on 12-hour shifts would be impacted. For example,
assuming a 60-hour work week at $15/hour, each employee would be paid $150 more per
week. Annually, the cost to dairy statewide would be $37.5 million (assuming
$150/week/employee, 50 weeks/year, and 5,000 dairy employees statewide).
Tree fruit, grapes, and vegetables would have a difficult time spreading work out into shifts and
would likewise take a hit of tens of millions.
Some farms would be able to schedule differently if they could get additional labor. Some farms
might be able to mechanize to some extent. Most farms would take a financial hit.

Page 2 of 3
 Summary of Finances
(as of June 10, 2019)

Contributions:

• WAFLA - $25,000
• Washington State Dairy Federation - $20,000
• Washington State Tree Fruit Association - $15,000
• Washington Farm Bureau Legal Foundation - $10,000
• Yakima County Farm Bureau - $5,000
• Hop Growers of Washington - $2,500
• Washington Cattle Feeders Association - $2,500
• Washington Friends of Farms & Forests - $1,000
• Total: $81,000

Expenses:

• Outside legal review by Schwabe - $2,976.75

• Legal expenses to Stoel Rives - $79,011.62 (includes hitting the $55,000 cap for Superior
Court)
• Total: $81,998.37

Anticipated Remaining Costs:

• Approximately $36,000 for legal representation fees (We have negotiated a cap on legal
expenses for the Interlocutory Appeal to the Supreme Court.)
• Incidental fees (deliveries, filings, etc.) of an unknown total
• Potential additional legal representation and fees, depending on the Supreme Court
ruling

Page 3 of 3