I have often said that the USDOL is a politically charged industry and its view on legal issues (much like the National Labor Relations Board) shifts with the Administration that is in power. For example, under the prior administration, the agency took a pro-business stance and issued pro-business Opinion Letters on independent contractor and working
I have settled numerous FLSA cases and note that there are many elements that management-side lawyers always want to see in such a document. One is a confidentiality provision as we do not want the employee “shooting his mouth off” over what he received in settlement. We also want as broad a Release as possible
I have been praising the Opinion Letters which have, of late, been issuing from the US Department of Labor because, candidly, they are displaying a business friendly attitude, or should I say, a pragmatic approach to the thorny issues employers face in the maze of USDOL regulations. Well, this may all change as President Biden
In FLSA cases, plaintiff lawyers are always looking for a deep pocket and one of the avenues they use towards this “goal” is the joint employer doctrine. That doctrine allows more than one employer to be liable for employee damages (e.g. overtime, back wages) if the employers are found to co-determine employee terms and conditions
Are two lawsuits better than one? Not for the employer, I can tell you that. A very interesting case is working its way through the federal courts now, where the US Department of Labor wants to take over a private lawsuit that has been filed alleging Fair Labor Standards Act violations. The government is contending
There have been many cases brought recently focusing on the compensability of security checks and in these days of temperature checking for COVID, we expect to see many more. Some of these cases have gone for the employer and others for the employees. In a recent case seeking compensation under the New Jersey Wage and
The USDOL has been issuing a slew of Opinion Letters of late, under the stewardship of Cheryl M. Stanton, Administrator of the Wage and Hour Division. Many of these deal with bonus issues and how these payments can and should be used by employers vis-à-vis their obligations to be compliant with the FLSA. The agency
The last several years have been quite worrisome to me, as a management side practitioner, on the issue of USDOL agency-initiated liquidated damages assessments. It used to be that only when the USDOL took an entity to court did it seek liquidated damages. Then, some years ago, during the Obama Administration, the agency began seeking
When FLSA lawsuits are settled, the matter must go before a federal judge for approval, as opposed to when a “demand letter” is sent and the parties settle prior to suit. There are many elements that a court must look at to determine if the settlement is appropriate and the recent case of Fritz v
The USDOL has been pretty busy lately issuing new rules and interpretations about FLSA issues, including vague, nuanced issues like the inclusion (or not) of bonuses in the regular rate and the circumstances under which employers can utilize bonuses. The agency has again issued such a clarification allowing employers to provide bonuses (and hazard pay)