Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

Can Non-Exempt Employees Be Paid A Salary?

By Michael Miller on November 9, 2011
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

One approach employers can take to minimize the variable effect of overtime payments is to pay non-exempt employees on a salary basis.  This approach is known as the fluctuating workweek (FWW) method and is permitted by the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) regulations.  In particular, the FLSA regulations allow an employer to compensate a non-exempt employee on a salary basis by providing straight-time compensation for all hours worked in a week and additionally paying only 0.5 times (rather than 1.5 times) the regular rate for all hours worked in excess of 40 for that week.  29 C.F.R. § 778.114.
To use the FWW method the employer must demonstrate:  (a) the employee’s hours fluctuate from week to week; (b) the employee must receive a fixed salary that does not vary with the number of hours worked during the week (exclusive of overtime pay); (c) the fixed salary must provide a regular hourly rate for each week that is at least the minimum wage; and (d) the employee and the employer must share a clear understanding that the fixed salary applies regardless of the number of hours worked.  29 C.F.R. § 778.114.  Although not required by the FLSA regulations, employers usually place these terms in writing to the employee to ensure clear communication.
It is important to note that the fixed salary is a guaranteed rate for any week in which the employee works.  Thus, an employee’s salary cannot be reduced due to sickness, holiday, or lack of work in such weeks.  DOL Opinion Letter, FLSA 2006-15 (May 12, 2006) (“Therefore, it is our opinion that your client may not make full day deductions from the salary of its fluctuating workweek employees when the employee has exhausted his or her sick leave bank or has not yet earned enough leave to cover the absence.”).  As implied by the DOL opinion letter, however, it is permissible to substitute paid time off under an employer’s PTO policies for such absences.  See, e.g., Griffin v. Wake County, 142 F.3d 712 (4th Cir. 1998).

  • Posted in:
    Employment & Labor
  • Blog:
    Minnesota Employer
  • Organization:
    Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo