Tag Archives: Supreme Court

Service Adviser Exemption Goes Back to the Supreme Court

On September 28, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear a case in which the Court will be asked to decide whether the FLSA’s overtime exemption covering “any salesman, partsman, or mechanic primarily engaged in selling or servicing automobiles.” The case is Encino Motorcars v. Navarro, No. 16-1362. If this sounds like déjà vu to … Continue Reading

Supreme Court Agrees to Hear Service Advisor OT Pay Split

As we reported back in October 2015 a car dealership, Encino Motorcars, petitioned the Supreme Court to “restore uniformity” to the enforcement of legal precedent and hold that service advisors are exempt from the FLSA’s overtime requirements.  On Friday, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case and hopefully resolve the issue once and for all … Continue Reading

Supreme Court Declines to Hear Severance Agreement FLSA Collective Action Waiver Case

The Supreme Court has declined to grant review of a Sixth Circuit decision that cast significant doubt on the effectiveness of an employee’s waiver of Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) collective action rights. Last summer, the Sixth Circuit became the first federal appellate court to address an employee’s waiver of rights to participate in a … Continue Reading

Second Circuit Extends FLSA Anti-Retaliation Provision to More Oral Complaints

On April 20, the Second Circuit filled a gap left open by the Supreme Court by extending the Fair Labor Standards Act’s (FLSA) anti-retaliation provisions to oral complaints made to an employer (rather than just complaints made to a government agency). In Greathouse v. JHS Security, Inc., the appeals court cited both Supreme Court precedent … Continue Reading

Supreme Court Rejects Notice and Comment Rulemaking Requirement for Agency Interpretations

In a case we labeled one of the “cases to watch” this term, a relatively unified Supreme Court decided in Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Association that a federal agency does not need to engage in notice-and-comment rulemaking pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) before it can significantly alter an interpretive rule of an agency … Continue Reading

Unanimous Supreme Court Rules Employer Need Not Pay for Worker Security Screenings: Integrity Staffing Solutions, Inc. v. Busk

In October, we profiled Integrity Staffing Solutions, Inc. v. Busk, a case asking whether time spent in security screenings is compensable under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). Warehouse workers sued Integrity Staffing under the FLSA for uncompensated time they were required to spend in lengthy security screenings (lasting up to 25 minutes) at the … Continue Reading

Wage and Hour Cases to Watch at the Supreme Court: Part 1--Integrity Staffing

This month marked the opening of the Supreme Court’s new term. For employment law practitioners, this session will be particularly busy with seven cases analyzing a range of employment questions, from the scope of the EEOC’s duty to conciliate discrimination claims (Mach Mining v. EEOC, oral argument set for January 2015 or later) to the … Continue Reading

Supreme Court Says No Need To Pay Union Employees for Certain Protective Gear Dressing if Bargaining Agreement Excludes It

In Sandifer v. U.S. Steel Corp., the U.S. Supreme Court held that the FLSA does not require unionized employers to compensate employees for time spent putting on and taking off certain protective clothing if they have a collective bargaining agreement that excludes this time as compensable work time. The U.S. Department of Labor’s regulations have … Continue Reading

Supreme Court 2013-2014 Term

In the 2013 – 2014 Supreme Court term, the Court will hear and decide a number of cases affecting employers, including one FLSA case.  Sandifer v. U.S. Steel Corp.: The Court will consider what constitutes “changing clothes” under the FLSA. Under §203(o) of the FLSA, an employer need not compensate a worker for time spent … Continue Reading

Supreme Court Finds Pharmaceutical Representatives Exempt From Overtime

This morning the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that pharmaceutical representatives are “outside salesmen” exempt from the overtime requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act. Christopher v. Smithkline Beecham Corp. (.pdf).  This has been a hotly-contested issue in the courts and the subject of a split between the federal appellate courts, with the Ninth and … Continue Reading

Justices Deny Review of Applebee's Tip Credit Ruling

In May, my partner Staci reported on a ruling against Applebee’s by the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, holding that tipped employees who spent more than 20 percent of their working time on nontipped activities like cleaning restrooms were entitled to the federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour. Applebee’s asked the U.S. Supreme Court … Continue Reading
LexBlog