|
|
|
  Overtime Issue for Home Care Workers is Alive as Senators Press to Have US DOL Regulations Altered or Reinterpreted.Ford & Harrison LLP - July 01, 2009 What Happened Two Years Ago... In Long Island Care at Home, Ltd. v. Coke, 549 U.S. 1105 (June 11, 2007), the Supreme Court deferred to the U.S. Department of Labor's interpretation of its own regulations and unanimously held that home care workers employed by third party employers or agencies were exempt from overtime under the "companionship exemption" to the Fair Labor Standards Act. Coupled with the overtime exemption available to non-profit agencies in New York (where Medicaid funded home care can be 24/7) who had timely filed a Statement of Non-Profitmaking Institutions with the NYS Department of Labor, this fully exempted those agencies, in particular, from overtime pay to home care workers. Report Link Supreme Court Upholds Companionship Exemption.Ford & Harrison LLP - June 14, 2007 Third party home care providers breathed a collective sigh of relief yesterday when the United States Supreme Court reversed a ruling out of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals which held that the companionship exemption from the Fair Labor Standard Act's (FLSA) overtime requirements was not valid and binding as it related to third party providers of temporary home care services. Report Link Supreme Court Gives a Helping Hand to Home Healthcare Agencies in Upholding the FLSA's Companionship Exemption to Third-Party Employers.Littler Mendelson, P.C. - June 14, 2007 On June 11, 2007, the United States Supreme Court decided Long Island Care at Home Ltd. v. Coke, U.S., No. 06-593. In a significant victory for third-party employers of companionship workers, the Court held that the Fair Labor Standards Act's companionship services exemption properly applies to third-party employers such as home healthcare agencies. Report Link FLSA Overtime Exemption Applies to Companions Employed by Agencies, Supreme Court Rules.Jackson Lewis LLP - June 12, 2007 Bringing to a close almost five years of litigation, a unanimous Supreme Court has held that home health aides and other companions employed by third parties are not eligible for overtime compensation under federal law. In its June 11, 2007, decision, the Court upheld a longstanding interpretation of the United States Department of Labor, while overturning a contrary decision of a federal appellate court in New York. Report Link Argument Before The Supreme Court Reflects Divergence of Opinion Over Companionship Exemption.Jackson Lewis LLP - April 18, 2007 Must employers pay home health aides overtime? Report Link Supreme Court Set To Hear Oral Argument On FLSA Companionship Exemption.Jackson Lewis LLP - March 28, 2007 The Supreme Court is set to decide whether employers must pay overtime to home health aides under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). Report Link Home Care Companions to Get Overtime, Says Federal Appeals Court (Again).Jackson Lewis LLP - September 11, 2006 Despite instructions from the U. S. Supreme Court, the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit -- for a second time -- delivered a blow to the Department of Labor's "companionship services" exemption to health care aides employed by third-party companies or agencies. The Second Circuit rejected the regulations, finding that they are not supported by the Fair Labor Standards Act itself. Consequently, home health care aides are entitled to overtime pay when working over 40 hours in a workweek in New York, Connecticut or Vermont (and perhaps elsewhere if this ruling is adopted).
Report Link "Companionship Services" OT Exemption Does Not Apply To Home Healthcare Workers of Third-Party Employers.Jackson Lewis LLP - August 12, 2004 Home care workers employed by home care agencies or other "third parties" are covered by the overtime and minimum wage provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act and are entitled to overtime pay, according to a new ruling by the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Report Link Home Care Nurse Receiving Combination "Fee" and Per Hour Compensation Is Not Exempt from Overtime Pay.Jackson Lewis LLP - April 01, 2002 Discusses Elwell v. University Hosps. Home Care Servs., No. 00-3061 (6th Cir. January 11, 2002), in which the court held that a home health care nurse who was paid a set fee for home patient visits plus an hourly rate for other work she performed in connection with her job was not an exempt professional for purposes of overtime pay under the federal wage and hour law.
|
ArticlesFound: 9 ArticlesNO SUBTOPICSEmployment Law Seminars
Employment Law 101 for HR Professionals
Las Vegas
March 23, 2010 Fisher & PhillipsCalifornia Legally Required Sexual Harassment Training: It's Never Too Late To ComplyNewport Beach
March 23, 2010 Fisher & PhillipsCalifornia Legally Required Sexual Harassment Training: It's Never Too Late To ComplySan Francisco
March 23, 2010 Fisher & Phillips2010 Public Sexual Harassment Training for supervisors and managers.Glendale
March 23, 2010 Ballard Rosenberg2010 Employment Law UpdateSan Jose
March 23, 2010 LittlerHow to Prepare a Response to a DFEH/EEOC ChargeWebinar
March 23, 2010 Shaw ValenzaTOP 10 TIPS FOR CREATING A BLOGGING, SOCIAL MEDIA AND CELL PHONE POLICYOnline
March 23, 2010 HR Learning Center LLCNegotiating Your Business to the TopOrlando
March 23, 2010 Ford & HarrisonCalifornia Legally Required Sexual Harassment Training: It's Never Too Late To ComplySan Diego
March 24, 2010 Fisher & PhillipsEmployment Law Breakfast Briefings`Kenner
March 24, 2010 Fisher & Phillips |
|
| ||
|
Terms of Use
|
Privacy
|
Advertising
|
About
|
Contact
|
For Law Firms
|
Partners
Copyright © 2010 elinfonet.com, llc.
The use of this site, and the terms and conditions for our providing information, is governed by our Terms of Use, including the disclaimers contained therein. By using this site, you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Use and that you accept and will be bound by the terms thereof.
This site is designed for lawyers concentrating in employment law and human resource professionals who specialize in employee relations. As more fully set forth in the terms of use, the information provided on or through this site is for general information purposes; it is not a determination of your legal rights, nor your responsibilities under the law. None of the information contained on this site is, or should be construed as, legal advice. The information should not be relied upon for legal advice. We are not engaged in the practice of law and no attorney-client relationship is being created. Any information communicated to any lawyer via this site does not have the confidentiality protection of the attorney/client privilege. If you are seeking legal advice, find a qualified lawyer in your area. If you need help finding a lawyer, call your local, county or state bar association. All logos and trademarks on this site are property of their respective owners. | ||
Federal Article Feeds