Court Deals Blow to Nationwide Wage Claims: What the Second Circuit's New Ruling Means for Georgia Employers and Workers

When can workers across the country join together in a single federal wage-and-hour lawsuit against their employer? That question just got a clearer answer in much of the country — but in Georgia and the Eleventh Circuit, it still depends on who you ask.

The Second Circuit Weighs In

On May 4, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued a significant ruling in Provencher v. Bimbo Foods Bakeries Distribution LLC, et al. Two Vermont delivery drivers sued a nationwide bakery, claiming it misclassified them as independent contractors and withheld overtime pay in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). Rather than limiting their lawsuit to Vermont workers, the drivers sought to represent delivery drivers across the country.

The Second Circuit said no. The court held that federal courts cannot hear FLSA wage claims brought by out-of-state workers unless the employer is essentially headquartered in — or has consented to suit in — the forum state. Each opt-in plaintiff in an FLSA collective action must independently establish a connection between their own claims and the state where the lawsuit was filed.

The decision extends the reach of the Supreme Court's 2017 ruling in Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, San Francisco County et al., which requires courts to analyze personal jurisdiction on a claim-by-claim basis. The Second Circuit is now the sixth federal appeals court to apply that principle to FLSA collective actions, joining the Third, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth, and Ninth Circuits. Only the First Circuit has reached the opposite conclusion.

The Practical Impact

For employers, the ruling is a meaningful tool. Workers can no longer recruit employees from dozens of states into a single FLSA lawsuit filed in New York, Connecticut, or Vermont simply because the employer does business there. If the employer is not at home in the forum state, out-of-state plaintiffs face dismissal.

The decision cuts both ways, though. Shutting down a nationwide collective in one state may push plaintiffs to file multiple suits in different jurisdictions, or to simply file where the employer is headquartered — where the employer cannot invoke Bristol-Myers at all. Employers should factor in that risk before moving to dismiss.

Where Does the Eleventh Circuit Stand?

Georgia, Alabama, and Florida fall within the Eleventh Circuit — and that court has not yet ruled on whether Bristol-Myers applies to FLSA collective actions. The question is formally open.

The trend, however, is clear. In July 2024, a federal judge in the Northern District of Georgia took up the issue directly in Brown v. MUY Pizza-Tejas, LLC, a minimum wage dispute brought by pizza delivery drivers against a Pizza Hut franchisee that operated restaurants across 44 states. The court found the majority's approach "persuasive" and agreed that Bristol-Myers limits personal jurisdiction in FLSA cases — meaning out-of-state workers cannot ride the coattails of an in-state plaintiff to hale a defendant into court on claims that have no connection to the forum state.

With the Second Circuit now the sixth to adopt this view, Eleventh Circuit district courts will face even stronger persuasive authority going forward. And if the circuit split grows no further, the Supreme Court — which has twice declined to resolve it — may eventually be compelled to step in.

Bottom Line

If you are a Georgia employer facing a potential FLSA collective action, the jurisdictional question — whether out-of-state workers can actually sue you here — is worth raising early. If you are a worker, where you file matters more than ever. Contact our employment litigation team to discuss your rights and options.