Twenty-one states, led by Texas and Nevada, have filed a lawsuit against the Department of Labor seeking a preliminary and permanent injunction declaring unlawful the DOL’s Final Rule amending the overtime exemption for executive, administrative, and professional employees (the “white collar” exemptions) under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Articles Discussing Overtime Exemptions Under The FLSA.
Yesterday, a group of 21 states filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas challenging the Department of Labor’s new overtime rule, which is set to take effect on December 1, 2016. The group challenging the rule is led by Texas and Nevada, and includes the following states: Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Mississippi, Nebraska, New Mexico, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Utah, and Wisconsin. The lawsuit names as Defendants the DOL and its Wage and Hour Division, Secretary of Labor Thomas Perez, and Wage and Hour Administrator David Weil, and Assistant Administrator for Policy Mary Ziegler.
A group of Democratic lawmakers (yes, you read that right) have introduced legislation aimed at easing the sting of the new federal overtime exemption regulations that currently are slated to take effect December 1, 2016.
On June 30, 2016, President Obama signed the Puerto Rico Oversight, Management, and Economic Stability Act (S. 2328), commonly known as “PROMESA.” This measure, which was enacted with bipartisan support, effectively delays application of the U.S. Department of Labor’s (DOL) new overtime rule to employees in Puerto Rico.
The U.S. Department of Labor’s new Final Rule as to the Fair Labor Standards Act’s “white collar” exemptions to overtime could open employers up to class action liability as previously exempt employees fail to meet new salary requirements.
Every economist knows that there’s no such thing as a free lunch. That’s as true in the labor market as in any other area of the economy, but you’d hardly know that by reading the DOL’s publications promoting its new overtime exemption rules. For example, in a recent blog post, Dr. David Weil, Administrator of the DOL’s Wage and Hour Division, set out to debunk some purported “myths” about the new rules. Reading this post, one is left with the impression that the new rules will benefit pretty much every affected employee with no real burden on employers. Here are some thoughts on these “myths” and the “truths” that Dr. Weil offers in response to each:
The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) published the final rule revising the “white collar” overtime exemption regulations on May 18, 2016. This publication was the result of a process that began in March 2014 when President Obama directed the Secretary of Labor to review and “modernize” the current overtime regulations. In the final rule, the DOL estimates that the changes will impact 4.2 million white collar workers.
One of the issues that colleges and universities are struggling with under the new FLSA overtime exemption rules is how to compensate residence hall directors. While responsibilities vary from institution to institution, residence hall directors generally are responsible for overseeing students living in a college or university residence hall.
As schools seek to adjust to the new Department of Labor overtime exemption rules and increased salary standards, nearly every institution has classification and overtime-calculation questions about athletic coaches and athletic trainer positions. The NCAA (in conjunction with CUPA-HR) has now issued a helpful paper addressing exemption analysis and practical considerations applicable to these roles that can be found here.
Thank you to those who attended today’s webinar, “New DOL Overtime Exemption Rules – What You Really Need to Know Now.” We hope that everyone enjoyed the presentation and learned information that will assist in getting your organization ready for compliance.
On the same day the U.S. Department of Labor released its Final Rule updating regulations under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) governing overtime exemptions for executive, administrative, and professional employees (commonly known as the “white collar exemptions” or “EAP exemptions”), a bill was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives that would delay implementation of the Final Rule in Puerto Rico for at least two years after enactment of the bill, until certain conditions are met. (For details on the Final Rule, see our article, Labor Department Announces Final Rule Amending Overtime Regulations for ‘White Collar’ Workers.)
On May 18, 2016, the U.S. Department of Labor published its Final Rule updating the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) overtime regulations regarding the executive, administrative and professional exemptions (the “FLSA White Collar Exemptions”). The Final Rule does not make any changes to the outside sales or computer professional exemptions.
On May 18, 2016, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) issued its final rule on changes to four exemptions to the overtime pay requirement of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA): the executive, administrative, and professional (EAP) exemptions and the highly compensated employee exemption.
After more than two years of publicity and tremendous speculation surrounding what the new overtime regulations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) would look like after President Obama directed the Secretary of Labor to “modernize and streamline” them, the final version of the rule is finally here – and now the work really begins for employers. By now, we’re all familiar with the reasons behind the changes (but if you’re not, you can see our article here that links back to three earlier articles on the topic). So, let’s get to the nitty gritty of the actual changes to the overtime rule and what they mean for you.
Earlier this week, in a matter of first impression within the Second Circuit, Judge P. Kevin Castel of the Southern District of New York held that employees who teach English as a second language (“ESL”) at a privately-owned ESL learning center qualify for the professional exemption under the FLSA as “teachers.” Fernandez v. Zoni Language Ctrs., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 65310 (S.D.N.Y. 2016).