Just In Time For Tax Season--Auditors Test Professional Exemption Against Price Waterhouse in Yet Another Class Action
I have noticed that there are not many lawsuits (e.g. class actions) brought that test the limits of the professional exemption. That exemption, geared towards anyone with an advanced degree (lawyer, doctor, CPA, engineer) is fairly well defined and a lawsuit easily defended. That rule, however, has its exceptions, as demonstrated by the granting of conditional certification to a class of more than three-hundred PriceWaterhouse auditors who claim that, since they were not CPAs, they were not exempt and are entitled to overtime. The case is entitled Kress et al. v. PriceWaterhouse Coopers LLP and was filed in federal court in the Eastern District of California.
This development is another in a long saga of claims by such employees that the Company has, in a wholesale manner, misclassified them and denied them overtime. The employees contend that they typically worked fifty-five hours per week during the tax season but were always denied overtime.
The Company has defended with the only defense that it can, the professional exemption as there seems to be little dispute that these employees worked the hours that the Complaint alleges. In other words, the Company is in for a dime, in for a dollar—if the defense is successful, then every member of the class gets nothing. If it is unsuccessful, the liability will be astronomical (in all likelihood). The plaintiffs counter by alleging that the Company’s required training regimen for its auditors coupled with the absence of additional training requirements renders the professional exemption inapplicable, as there was no advanced course of study required for the position.
The Company has also defended by contending that the actual duties and work of each associate must be scrutinized on a weekly basis, which means that too much individual scrutiny (my favorite defense) is necessary, thus defeating the class action. This may actually turn out to be a better defense than the exemption defense?
When defending a professional exemption case, I always ascertain if an advanced degree is required and held by the employees at issue or an advanced license, like a CPA license. The difference between “staff accountants” or “junior auditors” which are non-exempt jobs and an exempt professional is that degree. Management side practitioners must always start and end the analysis with that inquiry.