Of the three white collar exemptions, the administrative exemption is the vaguest and the hardest for an employer to prove. In an important case, the First Circuit has weighed in on when that exemption applies and held that some employees
I have written about the collaborative arrangements, information sharing arrangements, that the USDOL has entered into with state DOLs and how that is a dangerous portent for employers. Well, the landscape has again changed on this front, foreboding more potential
I read an interesting article by Linda Bond Edwards from Rumberger Kirk which addressed the issue of paying employees a “salary” in exempt and non-exempt scenarios. The article brings up the very misunderstood issue of what a “salary” really means
I have handled numerous prevailing wage cases, including dozens under the federal Davis-Bacon Act (DBA) and read with great interest the proposed changes to the decades-old law. The proposed rule will likely set higher rates on DBA construction projects, a
As is common knowledge, and as I wrote last week, the USDOL has proposed to raise the minimum salary required for exempt status for the Part 541 white collar exemptions to more than $1000 per week. Although that will naturally
Sharing my colleague Glenn Grindlinger’s recent alert on the DOL’s proposal to increase salary thresholds for determining when an employee is exempt from overtime. Employers take note, this could mean significantly increased overtime costs and mandates that employers carefully scrutinize
It is always the employer’s burden of proof to prove an exemption under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), but there is controversy over what that evidentiary standard should be. In a recent case, a federal appellate court has ruled
I read an interesting post by Frank Shuster of Constangy, Brooks, Smith on the thorny and often misunderstood issue of the “regular rate” and what that concept entails for compliance with the FLSA. Many employers, well-intentioned and seeking to comply
It seems every other week there is a call center case involving preliminary and postliminary working time. Now, it is a Wayfair call center. The customer service workers allege that the booting up of their computers and their logging into
Plaintiff lawyers are always asserting that every single alleged wage hour violation is “willful” so when they start negotiating a settlement (or trying to) they always start from that position, i.e. an extra year of liability. I think that shows
