USDOL To Announce Proposed Domestic Service Rule Expanding Right To Overtime Pay

As we reported here, the Wage and Hour Division of the U.S. Department of Labor previously announced it would propose a rule regarding the applicability of the companionship exemption to the FLSA's minimum wage and overtime requirements. This longstanding exemption was the subject of a rare Supreme Court opinion on FLSA issues, in which the Court upheld the exemption's historic application to individuals employed by third party agencies who provide care in a private home. Long Island Care at Home, Ltd. v. Coke, 551 U.S. 158 (2007). According to news reports, Labor Secretary Hilda Solis will announce the Department's rulemaking proposal today. 

If enacted, the proposed rules will likely eliminate or eviscerate the exemption, bringing many if not most home health aides and other domestic workers within the ambit of FLSA protection. This regulatory change would pose difficult fiscal challenges to individuals who require such services on a regular, sometimes round-the-clock basis, and to agencies which are in the business of providing such services to Medicare or Medicaid-eligible individuals, and which are reimbursed for providing those services at a fixed rate.

Industry employers should review the proposed rule closely and prepare to participate in the mandatory 60-day notice and comment period which will follow its announcement, as the comment period will provide the employer community with its first and likely best opportunity to influence the rule. 

Arizona, Florida, Six Other States To Raise Minimum Wage For 2012 (And San Francisco, Too)

The state minimum wage is set to increase in eight states at the start of the new year.  By statute, many states review and revise their respective minimum wage annually, to reflect changes in the cost of living.  San Francisco, one of several municipalities with its own minimum wage law, will also increase its minimum wage.  More detailed coverage is available here.

Massachusetts Federal Judge Issues Decision Expansively Interpreting FLSA's Minimum Wage Obligations

As we have discussed, federal courts generally interpret the FLSA in conformity with longstanding FLSA principles stated in, among other seminal cases, United States v. Klinghoffer Bros. Realty Corp., 285 F.2d 487 (2d Cir. 1960). Under the Klinghoffer rule, the FLSA generally just mandates: 1) the payment of overtime at the regular rate for hours in excess of 40; and, 2) that employees receive en toto at least minimum wage for all hours of work in a workweek. Thus, an employee who is paid for 35 hours at a rate above the minimum wage, and then later alleges that he or she worked 36 hours, has a claim under the FLSA only if inclusion of that additional hour pushes his or her regular rate for the 36 compensable hours below the minimum wage (currently $7.25/hour). A new decision calls this longstanding rule into question. Norceide v. Cambridge Health Alliance, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 103686 (D. Mass. Aug. 28, 2011).

In reviewing Defendant’s motion to dismiss a non-overtime off-the-clock claim under Klinghoffer, Judge Nancy Gertner observed that the courts following the Klinghoffer rule have “mostly done so by citing to Klinghoffer without any further analysis of whether, in fact, the weekly average rule effectuates the legislative intent of the FLSA's minimum wage law.” Id. at * 12. Observing that the First Circuit (encompassing Massachusetts) has not had cause to rule on the issue, the judge concluded that “the plain language of the minimum wage provision, the remaining parts of the FLSA, and the Congress' primary goal of protecting workers buttresses the conclusion that Congress intended for the hour-by-hour method to be used for determining a minimum wage violation.” Id. at * 19.

While many state laws already provide employee protection for gap time by requiring an agreed upon rate to be paid for all hours worked, Norceide is an adverse decision for all employers, particularly those with operations in jurisdictions regulated predominately or exclusively by the FLSA, and those within the First Circuit (Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Maine and Puerto Rico). Such employers are not only liable for gap time claims but also the additional 100% liquidated damages available under the FLSA. Proper tracking of hours worked remains of paramount importance for all employers.

Oregon Increases Minimum Wage To Reflect Hike In Consumer Price Index

Pursuant to a 2002 ballot measure, Oregon state law requires an annual minimum wage adjustment to keep pace with inflation, as measured by the Consumer Price Index. Oregon Labor Commissioner Brad Avakian recently announced that based on the CPI the 2012 minimum wage in Oregon will be $8.80/hour, up from $8.50/hour at present. Oregon is one of several states (including Florida, Washington, Nevada and six others) which ties minimum wage assessment and increases to the CPI.

As the political debate continues to rage regarding the best ways to protect workers and jumpstart the national economy, states will continue to adopt individualized measures, such as tying increases to inflation or (at the other extreme) outright repeal of the minimum wage. Employers must always stay abreast of state law developments in each state in which they operate and ensure compliance with the maze of state wage and hour laws. 

 

New Hampshire Repeals Minimum Wage Law

In keeping with the State’s “Live Free or Die” motto, the New Hampshire legislature last week took the unusual step of repealing the State’s minimum wage law.  This action, supported by Republican legislators seeking to eliminate what they consider “job killing” regulations, has little practical effect, as the repealed New Hampshire minimum wage was harmonized with the federal minimum of $7.25 per hour.  Thus, this repeal only impacts employers not covered by the FLSA, typically limited to small localized businesses operating intra-state with less than $500,000 in annual revenue.  In fact, many New Hampshire lawmakers supporting the bill acknowledged that the repeal was in large part symbolic.

One unclear aspect of the amendment pertains to the use of the tip credit under State law.  The amendment did not repeal New Hampshire’s provision requiring that a tip credit employee receive “a base rate from the employer of not less than 45% of the applicable minimum wage.”  It is unclear whether this provision now can be read to refer to the federal “applicable minimum wage,” or whether New Hampshire law simply defers to the federal requirement.  At present, tip credit employees only must receive $2.13 per hour under the FLSA (less than 45% of the federal minimum wage). 

“While the legislature obviously felt strongly, this change will have little or zero impact on most state employers of size,” observes Debra Weiss Ford, Managing Partner of Jackson Lewis’ Portsmouth, New Hampshire office.  “State employers need to continue to monitor wage/hour compliance, which in many industries is not focused on the minimum wage.” 

Other states are unlikely to follow New Hampshire’s lead, as the trend in most state legislatures, including New York and Massachusetts, has been to expand worker protections. We will continue to advise regarding legislative developments in this area, including the recent Congressional hearings on the efficacy of the FLSA.

Congressional Sub-Committee Holds Hearings On The Current State of the Fair Labor Standards Act/Additional DOL Developments

Earlier this month, the House of Representatives’ Sub-Committee on Workforce Protection convened a hearing entitled “The Fair Labor Standards Act: Is It Meeting the Needs of the Twenty-First Century Workplace?” A panel of speakers, representing Human Resources associations, management counsel and the employee advocacy group the National Employment Law Project, appeared before the Sub-Committee and responded to questions concerning, among other topics, the appropriateness of the current federal minimum wage of $7.25/hour, and whether the FLSA and its numerous arcane, difficult to understand provisions, create a barrier to compliance and economic growth. 

The three witnesses representing business interests all testified at length about the hardships associated with FLSA compliance, and the risks and costs of protracted and increasingly frequent litigation over FLSA issues. Judy Conti, a representative from the National Employment Law Project, an employee advocacy group, argued that absent the FLSA framework and private enforcement, employers would simply engage in a “race to the bottom” in an effort to further decrease labor costs. This viewpoint was also espoused by representative Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio). Statements from Representative Kucinich during the hearing regarding the inappropriateness of curtailing the FLSA can be viewed here

While this Congressional investigation into the need for FLSA reform should be heartening to employers throughout the United States, the present landscape continues to pose baffling problems for employers in terms of compliance and litigation avoidance, to say nothing of state law obligations.  

Interestingly, certain contemplated USDOL Wage and Hour Division actions may further increase employer obligations under the FLSA and exposure to FLSA lawsuits. In its semi-annual regulatory agenda, the Division indicated that in the fall it will propose a rule addressing the applicability of the companionship minimum wage and overtime exemption to companionship services provided in a domestic setting. The Division also indicated that it is continuing to work on a disclosure rule that could require employers to expain to employees the basis for their exempt and/or contractor classification.

Florida Increases Minimum Wage to $7.31 To Keep Pace with Consumer Price Index

Per an announcement on the Florida Agency for Workforce Innovation’s web site, the state minimum wage will increase, effective June 1, 2011, to $7.31 per hour. Under the Florida Minimum Wage Act (which applies to all workers covered by the FLSA), the Agency is required to adjust the Florida minimum wage pursuant to a calculation based on the percentage change in the federal  Consumer Price Index for urban wage earners and clerical workers in the South Region.  The tip credit under Florida law remains $3.02, thus the direct tip credit minimum wage for non-overtime hours has increased to $4.29.

This change highlights the common problem of subtle distinctions between the FLSA and state law. Florida employees covered by both statutes who are paid at the minimum wage (with or without a tip credit) must now receive six cents more per hour than minimum required by federal law, and receive overtime at time-and-one-half that rate, or $10.97.

State Law Update: Nevada Minimum Wage

Employers must not only ensure compliance with the federal minimum wage but also any applicable state minimum wage.  Nevada’s minimum wage is dependent on whether an employer offers qualified health insurance benefits.  Effective July 1, 2010, the Nevada minimum wage increases to $8.25 per hour for employers that do not offer qualified health insurance benefits, and to $7.25 per hour for employees that do offer such benefits.   While the $7.25 rate comports with the FLSA, it is still relevant to Nevada employers as Nevada requires payment of daily overtime if an employee works more than 8 hours in a day and has a regular rate of pay of less than 1½ times the state minimum wage. 

For further information, see Nevada Minimum Wage, Daily Overtime to Increase on July 1 at http://www.jacksonlewis.com/legalupdates/article.cfm?aid=2037

We Don't Have To Pay Our Interns - Do We?

For years, students and recent graduates have accepted internships with employers to gain work and practical experience.   Many, if not most, employers have treated and continue to treat these internships as “unpaid.” What’s more, in many industries (including film and advertising) this practice is an institutional rite of passage – part of “dues paying”.  Recent actions and pronouncements by representatives of the federal and various state departments of labor require employers to review their practices to ensure that good intentions (or professional rites of passage) are not leading to wage and hour liability. 

Technically, under the FLSA, there is no such thing as an “intern.”  In general, in order for an employer to avoid any minimum wage obligations an individual must be a “volunteer” or a “trainee”.  Since volunteers generally are not recognized in the for-profit sector, the utility of that classification is limited.   Thus interns, if they are to be unpaid, most likely must be “trainees” for FLSA purposes. In order to determine if an individual is a “trainee” exempt from minimum wage, the following six factors generally must be satisfied. 

1.      The training, even though it includes actual operation of the facilities of the employer, is similar to what would be given in a vocational school or academic educational instruction;

2.      The training is for the benefit of the trainees;

3.      The trainees do not displace regular employees, but work under their close observation;

4.      The employer that provides the training derives no immediate advantage from the activities of the trainees, and on occasion the employer’s operations may actually be impeded;

5.      The trainees are not necessarily entitled to a job at the conclusion of the training period; and

6.      The employer and the trainees understand that the trainees are not entitled to wages for the time spent in training.

The rub is that in many instances the intern is performing productive work that would normally be performed by a paid employee. In such a situation, even if the intern is receiving school credit, minimum wage is due under the FLSA.  In fact, per Nancy J. Leppink, the acting director of the USDOL’s Wage and Hour Division: ““If you’re a for-profit employer or you want to pursue an internship with a for-profit employer, there aren’t going to be many circumstances where you can have an internship and not be paid and still be in compliance with the law.”   It is also vital for those with internship programs to note that M. Patricia Smith, the Solicitor of Labor responsible for coordinating the Wage and Hour Division, initiated investigations against several businesses for their use of interns during her tenure as New York Commissioner of Labor.

As always, state law also must be considered.  While many states track the FLSA standard, there are various differentiations particularly relevant to multi-state employers.   For example, in New York, if an individual is receiving school credit, the individual generally is exempt from minimum wage payment obligations under state law.

What is the takeaway?  Businesses need to analyze exactly what the intern will do during the internship.  If the intern’s time will be spent primarily on productive work that would normally be performed by another employee, the business should consider paying the intern minimum wage to avoid any trailing legal issues.

 

How Broad is the Ninth Circuit's Woody Woo Decision?

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled that the FLSA does not restrict employer-mandated tip-pooling arrangements when no tip credit is taken by the employer against the minimum wage obligation.  Cumbie v. Woody Woo, Inc., et al., No. 08-35718 (9th Cir. Feb. 23, 2010).  Further, the Court rejected the DOL’s regulation at 29 C.F.R. § 531.35, and held that the employees in Woody Woo had no legal right under the FLSA to retain all of their tips, except where the tip credit is taken by their employer. 

In Woody Woo, all tips received by the restaurant went into a “tip pool”, the proceeds from which were redistributed to all employees, including the kitchen staff, who (it is universally understood) are not “customarily tipped” for the purposes of the FLSA in the restaurant industry.  Importantly, all employees received an hourly wage that complied with both federal and Oregon minimum wage laws: again (it can’t be said enough), no tip credit was taken

Based on this decision, in states where state wage-and-hour laws track the FLSA (or states with no applicable state wage law), especially those within the Ninth Circuit, employers may want to consider tip pooling arrangement similar to the one addressed by Woody Woo. Where the FLSA is the only statute at issue, Woody Woo stands for the proposition that, provided all employees receive the federal minimum wage (currently $7.25/hour), tips can be collected and redistributed to the entire labor pool, or even potentially kept by management, without violating the FLSA. 

However, in many states, state wage and hour laws expressly  prohibit the construct Woody Woo authorizes. In New York, for example, tip pooling and tip distribution is limited to voluntary pooling among employees who “customarily” receive tips and an employer or its agent cannot retain any tips. N.Y. Labor Law § 196-d.

Finally, even in states with no state law restrictions, common law theories of contract, quantum meruit or unjust enrichment (which are part of most states’ common laws), or statutory theories under consumer protection or business practices statutes can be utilized by employees to attack tip distribution arrangements where any tips are siphoned away from employees engaged in direct service. This concern is underscored if the customer is not explicitly advised that non-service personnel may receive a portion of tips. 

Further discussion of this decision can be found on www.JacksonLewis.com by clicking here.

Federal Minimum Wage Increase

On July 24, 2009, the final stage of the three-phase minimum wage increase contained in the Fair Minimum Wage Act of 2007 goes into effect. Employees covered by the Fair Labor Standards Act must now be paid no less than $7.25 per hour. A revised minimum wage poster has been prepared by the Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division.

Employers should take this opportunity to ensure that they have the required notices properly posted in their facility.  In addition, employers should review their payroll systems to ensure that appropriate rates are being paid, particularly in the case of employees being compensated on piece rate, shift rate, or daily rate, or employees for whom the employer takes a tip credit.