Blog Posts: FLSA
The United States Department of Labor (DOL) appears to be reviving the “Right to Know” initiative first proposed in 2010. This initiative is aimed at reducing worker misclassification by requiring employers to reveal more information about how they classify employees. The DOL recently announced its intention to collect information about “employers' experiences and workers' knowledge of basic employment laws and rules so as to better understand employees' experience with worker misclassification.” The DOL may ultimately use this information in crafting and implementing a new Right-to-Know rule.
You can't have it both ways. That's the message that an employees' attorney hopes to send in a $25 million lawsuit against the workers’ employer, a retail clothing company. The lawsuit alleges violations of overtime-pay laws, claiming that the company required its store managers to work a minimum of 45 hours per week without paying them for overtime, while simultaneously paying them hourly wages instead of salaries.
A recent decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit highlights the importance of well-drafted time-reporting policies and procedures. In White v. Baptist Memorial Health Care Corp., a nurse sued her employer under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) for lost wages. She alleged that the hospital’s timekeeping system automatically deducted time for an unpaid meal break, even though the hospital often required her to skip it or cut it short.
A bill that would have given California farmworkers the same overtime rights as other nonexempt California employees did not pass the State Assembly. As a result, the farmworkers will continue to earn overtime pay only after working 10 hours in a day or 60 hours in a week. Other employees in the state earn overtime after eight hours in a day or 40 hours in a week.
A record number of Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) lawsuits were filed in federal court in the 12 months ending in March 2102. A total of 7,064 FLSA lawsuits were filed in that period, which was an increase from the 7,006 filed the year before, and almost five times as many as the 1,457 cases filed in 1993, according to a chart compiled by law firm Seyfarth Shaw.
Traditionally, unpaid and low-paid internships provided a way for students and recent graduates to get a foot in the door, especially in popular and competitive fields such as media. In exchange for working for little or no money, interns would learn more about their chosen fields and, most importantly, make contacts and get industry references that could help them launch their careers. In some industries, completing an internship was virtually mandatory to be considered for an entry-level job.
Congress is currently considering several amendments to the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), including those that, if passed, would increase the federal minimum wage, affect whether workers in certain job categories would be exempt from minimum-wage and overtime requirements and increase protections for workers who report certain FLSA violations.
Traditionally, pharmaceutical sales reps were not paid overtime when they worked more than 40 hours per week. A lawsuit that went up to the U.S. Supreme Court challenged that practice, claiming that the drug company GlaxoSmithKline was violating the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) by not paying overtime to its sales reps. The Supreme Court, however, disagreed, ruling in a 5-4 decision on June 12 that pharmaceutical sales reps are employed as outside sales people, a job category that is exempt from overtime-pay requirements under a Department of Labor (DOL) regulation.
A company that deliberately misclassified employees as independent contractors to avoid paying minimum wage and overtime recently was ordered to pay over $570,000 in damages for the misclassification.
The U.S. Supreme Court is currently deciding a case on the question of whether pharmaceutical sales reps are exempt from the requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) for overtime pay. In Susan Schaefer-LaRose v. Eli Lilly & Co., the Seventh Circuit ruled on the same question, approaching it from a different angle.