Last year, the DOL announced an eye-popping $2 million Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) settlement with Hutco, Inc, a labor services firm, for Hutco’s miscalculation of “per diem” payments to temporary workers and contractors. The DOL found that Hutco “mischaracterized certain wages as ‘per diem’ payments and impermissibly excluded these wages when calculating overtime premiums

cars.jpg

In my last post, I outlined the “normal” commuting case after Congress passed the Employee Commuting Flexibility Act (ECFA). The ECFA clarified the applicability of the Portal-to-Portal Act to the payment of wages to employees who use employer-provided vehicles. Clarification was necessary because of two conflicting opinion letters on the topic issued by the DOL

Heigh Ho.jpgIf only “Heigh-Ho” from Disney’s Snow White had been written sometime in 1938, rather than 1937, maybe my FLSA-influenced version would have had a chance. O.k., on second thought, probably not. But today, one of the more convoluted areas of the FLSA relates to the compensability of travel time. In general, travel time for non-exempt

US Department of Labor logo.jpgRecently, we told you that President Obama had issued a Presidential Memorandum to the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) instructing its Secretary to update regulations regarding overtime protection for workers under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), the federal law that establishes minimum wage and overtime pay requirements. The regulations have not been revised at

Guest Blogger: Lindsey Marcus

The Third Circuit Court of Appeals, which covers Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware, and the U.S. Virgin Islands, recently became the third appellate court to adopt the federal common law standard for successor liability in a Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) claim. The decision likely means that successor employers will find it