On July 26, 2016, Judge William S. Duffey of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia issued a decision holding that an employer does not have to ensure tipped employees retain all of their tips if the company is not using the employee’s tips to satisfy part of the minimum wage

The substantive provisions of the FLSA protect covered non-exempt employees’ right to receive minimum wage and, as applicable, overtime pay.  The statute’s anti-retaliation provision is co-extensive: it protects employees from termination or other adverse employment action in response to complaints that those provisions were violated.  The FLSA however does not extend anti-retaliation protections to employees

In 2013 the Department of Labor announced new regulatory language that substantially limited the scope of the Fair Labor Standards Act’s companionship exemption. Those regulations, of course, were challenged through litigation which remains ongoing, and their implementation by the USDOL was delayed until many months after the original effective date of January 1, 2015. Though

Courts addressing FLSA misclassification claims brought by employees classified as salaried exempt workers must determine damages. In a new decision from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, Judge Jane Triche Milazzo ruled that successful Plaintiffs in one such misclassification case are only entitled to “half-time” damages. Further, the Court

Last week, an Indiana federal court dismissed a lawsuit brought by former University of Pennsylvania (“Penn”) athletes against the National Collegiate Athletic Association (“NCAA”) and a number of its member schools over their alleged employment status and corresponding minimum wage protection under the FLSA. Berger, et al. v. NCAA, et al., S.D. Ind., No. 1:14-CV-01710,

Overtime claims based on alleged “off the clock” work often turn on the question of whether the employer has “suffered or permitted” the employee to work uncompensated hours in excess of forty in the workweek. The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has affirmed a Mississippi district court’s finding that an employer

On Friday, the United States Supreme Court agreed to resolve the current split among the Circuit Courts regarding whether “service advisors” are exempt from overtime under the 213(b)(10) exemption, an exemption applicable to any “salesman, partsman, or mechanic” who is primarily engaged in “selling or servicing automobiles.” Both the Fourth and Fifth Circuits have held