In Alix v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (16 Misc 3d 844 [Sup Ct Albany County 2007]) two former Wal-Mart employees contended that Wal-Mart had used its store-level managers to implement a corporate-wide policy that involved the manipulation of time records and practices that were designed to compel employees to work "off the clock" without compensation. They sought to represent a class of some 200,000 individuals, employed or formerly employed by Wal-Mart in its stores throughout New York State. In denying class certification, the Supreme Court pointed out that an employee is permitted to file a complaint for unpaid wages with the Commissioner of Labor and that the Commissioner may conduct an investigation and, if the claim is sustained, order payment, with the award subject to Article 78 review (Alix, 16 Misc 3d at 860-862). Although it was pointed out that whether to act on the complaint is discretionary with the Commissioner, the Court still concluded that this did not mean that a class action was superior to a relatively swift, cost-free administrative resolution of the claims (Alix, 16 Misc 3d at 862). In affirming, the Third Department likewise observed: Specifically, an administrative remedy is available by which plaintiffs, in their status as employees, could file wage related complaints with the Department of Labor (see Labor Law 196,196-a). Simply because the Commissioner of Labor's authority to pursue such claims is discretionary (see Labor Law, 196[2]), this does not render such a proceeding less effective than a class action. The availability of the administrative process, and its focus on the particulars applicable to each employee's claim, make it in many ways a superior method by which the claims made by plaintiffs, and the proposed members of the class, can be pursued against defendant (Alix, AD3d at , 868 NYS2d at 376). But, it is also important to note that, in Alix, establishing the existence of the alleged policies and their impact on a given employee would necessarily require a detailed analysis of the specifics of each employee's complaint (Alix, AD3d at , 868 NYS2d at 376). In particular, it would be necessary to examine each employee's time cards and the corporate pay roll records and testimony would be required as to specific circumstances under which entries were made that resulted in a change in the time card of each employee (id.). In Alix v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc, plaintiffs sought to maintain a class action on behalf of some 200,000 current or former employees during a 12 year period, alleging, among other things, systematic manipulation of time records and predicating their claims on, among other laws, regulations promulgated by the Labor Department (see 22 NYCRR Part 142). To resolve the claims presented, there would have to be a fact-specific inquiry into each individual worker's circumstances and the accuracy of the time records reflecting the hours worked of each worker As the Appellate Division stated in Alix, the administrative processes of the Labor Department focuses on the particulars of each employee's claim (id.)