Employment Litigation · Primary-source case analysis

Kasten: The FLSA Protects Clear Oral Complaints

By Aneeta Mishra and Timothy Chan

Published September 13, 2026

Kasten v. Saint-Gobain Performance Plastics interprets the phrase filed any complaint in light of the FLSA’s enforcement design and the need for fair notice.

The employee objected to timeclock placement

Kasten alleged that he repeatedly told supervisors and human-resources personnel that timeclocks prevented workers from receiving credit for required donning and doffing time. He claimed the company discharged him because of those oral objections.

Oral complaints can be filed

The Court concluded that statutory text, history, enforcement practice, and the FLSA’s purpose support coverage of oral complaints. Limiting protection to writing would disadvantage workers with limited literacy and impede workplace-level resolution.

Fair notice remains essential

A communication must be sufficiently clear and detailed for a reasonable employer to understand it as an assertion of statutory rights and a call for protection. Casual remarks or indistinct grumbling do not automatically become protected complaints.

The case was remanded

The Court resolved oral-versus-written coverage but did not decide whether an internal complaint to a private employer qualifies in every circumstance because that argument had not been preserved. Lower courts were left to apply the fair-notice standard to the record.

Key takeaways

• Train supervisors to recognize clear oral wage complaints.
• Document the words, audience, timing, and requested response.
• Separate protected complaints from unrelated workplace disagreements.
• Evaluate causation using the complete disciplinary timeline.