Before the Court en banc. Opinion by Justice Douglas.
In this appeal, the Court considered whether Nevada law allows employers to require employees to pool their tips with other employees of a different rank. The Court held that NRS 608.160 permits employers to require tip-pooling as long as the employer does not take and keep the employees’ tips. In reaching this conclusion, the Court clarified that the United States District Court for the District of Nevada’s interpretation of NRS 608.160 as set forth in Moen v. Las Vegas International Hotel, Inc., 402 F.Supp. 157 (D. Nev. 1975), and adopted by the Nevada Supreme Court in Alford v. Harolds Club, 99 Nev. 670, 674, 669 P.2d 721, 723 (1983), did not create a “direct-benefit” test for tip-sharing because every tip-pooling policy benefits the employer in some way, and the benefit discussed in Moen was the keeping of employees’ tips by the employer. The Court then remanded this matter because the district court did not consider claims brought under NRS 608.100 and NRS 613.120, and NRS 233B.130 requires judicial review when an aggrieved party meets all applicable procedural requirements. The Court further determined that whether employees should be granted class certification is within the Labor Commissioner’s discretion. Accordingly, the district court erred in failing to defer to the Commissioner’s interpretation that NAC 607.200 did not permit class certification in this case. Reversed and remanded. (Seth T. Floyd, Associate in the Las Vegas office of McDonald Carano Wilson.)
