Pilot for these alleged overtime violations by bringing this “collective action” under the FLSA. See 29 U.S.C. § 216(b). A collective action allows Taylor to proceed against Pilot with other employees who are “similarly situated” to her. See id. In that a collective action lets Taylor represent a larger group with similar claims, it somewhat resembles a class action under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Class actions and collective actions differ, however, in at least two ways important here. First, whereas Rule 23 creates a regime where class members are either bound by the litigation or must opt out of a suit to avoid becoming parties bound by any judgment, the FLSA requires employees to opt in to the action. Compare Fidel v. Farley, 534 F.3d 508, 513 (6th Cir. 2008) (<HOLDING>) with 29 U.S.C. § 216(b). Second, whereas Rule
holding that a settlement agreement is not a court order and therefore a violation of the settlement agreement would not subject a party to contempt holding a party is bound by a concession in his brief recognizing that truck driving constitutes a class of jobs holding that a party is not bound by the testimony of a witness it calls holding that a nonnamed class member with opportunity to opt out constitutes a party bound by a settlement