Posts

Sixth Circuit: Off-Duty Law Enforcement Misclassified as Independent Contractors

/0 Comments/in /by

APPLIES TO

All Employers of KY, MI, OH, or TN Employees

EFFECTIVE

February 12, 2019

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

In Acosta v. Off Duty Policy Services, Inc., the Sixth Circuit applied the six-factor “economic reality” test to determine whether off-duty officers were misclassified as independent contractors for purposes of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). There, the employer provided private security services using off-duty, sworn police officers, as well as nonsworn workers. The workers were allowed to accept or reject work assignments, were provided basic equipment, but had to supply their own vehicles and uniforms. The sworn officers typically wore their officer uniforms and used their patrol vehicles, while the nonsworn workers had to use their own police-style vehicle.

Read more

New Wage and Hour Opinion Letters from the U.S. Department of Labor

/0 Comments/in /by

APPLIES TO

Applicable Employers under the FLSA and FMLA

EFFECTIVE

August 28, 2018

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

The U.S. Department of Labor’s (DOL) Wage and Hour Division (WHD) recently issued six opinion letters related to compliance with the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA). The opinion letters are meant to provide clarity on employee rights and employer obligations as interpreted by the DOL.

Read more

Eleventh Circuit: Joint Employer Standard Clarified Under the FLSA and Common Law

/0 Comments/in /by

APPLIES TO

All Employers with AL, FL, and GA Employees

EFFECTIVE

August 2, 2018

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

In Garcia-Celestino v. Ruiz Harvesting, Inc., the Eleventh Circuit distinguished the joint employer standard under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and common law. Each standard turns on the applicable definition of “employee” and “control,” but are not the same. There, migrant workers under the H-2A visa program filed suit against their employer and a citrus grove owner for minimum wage violations under the FLSA and for breach of their contract, which was based on federal immigration statutes and regulations. The court looked at whether or not the citrus grove owner was a joint employer.

Read more

Eleventh Circuit: Valet Uniforms May Be “Materials” Requiring FLSA Coverage of Employees

/0 Comments/in /by

APPLIES TO

Employers with AL, FL, and GA Employees

EFFECTIVE

June 29, 2018

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

In Asalde v. First Class Parking Sys. LLC, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeal stated that a jury may determine whether valet uniforms meet the “materials” definition for “enterprise coverage” which would allow them the protections of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The FLSA applies, in part, to employers who have “employees handling, selling, or otherwise working on goods or materials that have been moved in or produced for [interstate or international] commerce by any person” and have an annual volume of business of at least $500,000. (Emphasis added.)

Read more

Sixth Circuit: Do Volunteers Have an Expectation of Compensation?

/0 Comments/in /by

APPLIES TO

All Employers with KY, MI, OH, TN Volunteers

EFFECTIVE

April 16, 2018

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

In Acosta v. Cathedral Buffet, the Sixth Circuit recently clarified the definition of a volunteer. There, a buffet restaurant, a for-profit corporation operated by Grace Cathedral, used volunteers to service patrons in addition to regular employees. The faith leader at Grace Cathedral told church members that God was calling on them to volunteer at the buffet, and that failing to do so was tantamount to a sin under the church’s doctrine. As a result of the church’s strategies, many members did volunteer. Employees and volunteers performed the same restaurant-related tasks; however, volunteers were not paid for their time.

Read more

THE SCOTUS DECISION IS FINALLY HERE – Revisit Your Arbitration Agreements!

/0 Comments/in /by

APPLIES TO

All Employers

EFFECTIVE

May 21, 2018

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

At long last, the U.S. Supreme Court finally issued its ruling on whether or not class action waivers in arbitration agreements violate the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”) – short answer, they don’t.

Read more

May Updates

/0 Comments/in /by

APPLIES TO

Varies

EFFECTIVE

Varies

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456
This Short List addresses the following topics:
  1. EEO-1 Deadline Delayed to June 1, 2018
  2. IRS Issues Guidance on Family and Medical Leave Tax Credit
  3. Veteran Hiring Benchmark Lowered for 2018
  4. IRS Rolls Back 2018 HSA Contribution Limit Change
  5. U.S. DOL Launches Payroll Audit Pilot Program
  6. U.S. Supreme Court Settles FLSA Status of Car Dealership Service Advisors
  7. California: Staffing Agencies Need Not Police Meal Periods
  8. Emeryville, California: Minimum Wage Update
  9. Michigan: Local Governments Prohibited from Limiting Employer Interview Inquiries
  10. Nevada: Minimum Wage Will Not Change in 2018
  11. Pennsylvania: State Supreme Court Says “Actual Damages” Include Non-Economic Damages Under Whistleblower Law
  12. West Virginia: Employers May Not Prohibit Firearm Storage in Personal Vehicles

Read more

Ninth Circuit: DOL’s 80/20 Tip Credit Rule is Invalid

/0 Comments/in /by

APPLIES TO

All Employers of AK, AZ, CA, GA, HI, ID, MT, NV, OR, WA Employees

EFFECTIVE

September 6, 2017

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

The Department of Labor (“DOL”) permits employers to give a tip credit to tipped employees who spend no more than 20% of their time performing non-tipped duties. In Marsh v. J. Alexander’s, LLC, the Ninth Circuit noted that this rule is only found in the Field Operations Handbook used by the DOL as guidance for investigations by field officers, rather than in a statute or regulation; as a result, the court stated it was not valid.

Read more