Title 29—Labor--Volume 1
PART 778—OVERTIME COMPENSATION
§ 778.419   Hourly workers employed at two or more jobs.
(a) Under section 7(g)(2) an employee who performs two or more different kinds of work, for which different straight time hourly rates are established, may agree with his employer in advance of the performance of the work that he will be paid during overtime hours at a rate not less than one and one-half times the hourly nonovertime rate established for the type of work he is performing during such overtime hours. No additional overtime pay will be due under the act provided that the general requirements set forth in § 778.417 are met and;
(1) The hourly rate upon which the overtime rate is based in a bona fide rate;
(2) The overtime hours for which the overtime rate is paid qualify as overtime hours under section 7(e) (5), (6), or (7); and
(3) The number of overtime hours for which the overtime rate is paid equals or exceeds the number of hours worked in excess of the applicable maximum hours standard.
(b) An hourly rate will be regarded as a bona fide rate for a particular kind of work it is equal to or greater than the applicable minimum rate therefor and if it is the rate actually paid for such work when performed during nonovertime hours.
§ 778.420   Combined hourly rates and piece rates.
Where an employee works at a combination of hourly and piece rates, the payment of a rate not less than one and one-half times the hourly or piece rate applicable to the type of work being performed during the overtime hours will meet the overtime requirements of the Act if the provisions concerning piece rates (as discussed in § 778.418) and those concerning hourly rates (as discussed in § 778.419) are respectively met.
§ 778.421   Offset hour for hour.
Where overtime rates are paid pursuant to statute or contract for hours in excess of 8 in a day, or in excess of the applicable maximum hours standard, or in excess of the employees' normal working hours or regular working hours (as under section 7(e)(5) or for work on “special days” (as under section 7(e)(6), or pursuant to an applicable employment agreement for work outside of the hours established in good faith by the agreement as the basic, normal, or regular workday (not exceeding 8 hours) or workweek (not exceeding the applicable maximum hours standard) (under section 7(e) (7), the requirements of section 7(g) (1) and 7(g)(2) will be met if the number of such hours during which overtime rates were paid equals or exceeds the number of hours worked in excess of the applicable maximum hours standard for the particular workweek. It is not necessary to determine whether the total amount of compensation paid for such hours equals or exceeds the amount of compensation which would be due at the applicable rates for work performed during the hours after the applicable maximum in any workweek.
§ 778.500   Artificial regular rates.
(a) Since the term regular rate is defined to include all remuneration for employment (except statutory exclusions) whether derived from hourly rates, piece rates, production bonuses or other sources, the overtime provisions of the act cannot be avoided by setting an artificially low hourly rate upon which overtime pay is to be based and making up the additional compensation due to employees by other means. The established hourly rate is the “regular rate” to an employee only if the hourly earnings are the sole source of his compensation. Payment for overtime on the basis of an artificial “regular” rate will not result in compliance with the overtime provisions of the Act.
(b) It may be helpful to describe a few schemes that have been attempted and to indicate the pitfalls inherent in the adoption of such schemes. The device of the varying rate which decreases as the length of the workweek increases has already been discussed in §§ 778.321 through 778.329. It might be well, however, to re-emphasize that the hourly rate paid for the identical work during the hours in excess of the applicable maximum hours standard cannot be lower than the rate paid for the nonovertime hours nor can the hourly rate vary from week to week inversely with the length of the workweek. It has been pointed out that, except in limited situations under contracts which qualify under section 7(f), it is not possible for an employer lawfully to agree with his employees that they will receive the same total sum, comprising both straight time and overtime compensation, in all weeks without regard to the number of overtime hours (if any) worked in any workweek. The result cannot be achieved by the payment of a fixed salary or by the payment of a lump sum for overtime or by any other method or device.
(c) Where the employee is hired at a low hourly rate supplemented by facilities furnished by the employer, bonuses (other than those excluded under section 7(e)), commissions, pay ostensibly (but not actually) made for idle hours, or the like, his regular rate is not the hourly rate but is the rate determined by dividing his total compensation from all these sources in any workweek by the number of hours worked in the week. Payment of overtime compensation based on the hourly rate alone in such a situation would not meet the overtime requirements of the Act.
(d) One scheme to evade the full penalty of the Act was that of setting an arbitrary low hourly rate upon which overtime compensation at time and one-half would be computed for all hours worked in excess of the applicable maximum hours standard; coupled with this arrangement was a guarantee that if the employee's straight time and overtime compensation, based on this rate, fell short, in any week, of the compensation that would be due on a piece-rate basis of x cents per piece, the employee would be paid on the piece-rate basis instead. The hourly rate was set so low that it never (or seldom) was operative. This scheme was found by the Supreme Court to be violative of the overtime provisions of the Act in the case of Walling v. Youngerman-Reynolds Hardwood Co., 325 U.S. 427. The regular rate of the employee involved was found to be the quotient of total piece-rate earnings paid in any week divided by the total hours worked in such week.
(e) The scheme is no better if the employer agrees to pay straight time and overtime compensation on the arbitrary hourly rates and to make up the difference between this total sum and the piece-rate total in the form of a bonus to each employee. (For further discussion of the refinements of this plan, see §§ 778.502 and 778.503.)
§ 778.501   The “split-day” plan.
(a) Another device designed to evade the overtime requirements of the Act was a plan known as the “Poxon” or “split-day” plan. Under this plan the normal or regular workday is artificially divided into two portions one of which is arbitrarily labeled the “straight time” portion of the day and the other the “overtime” portion. Under such a plan, an employee who would ordinarily command an hourly rate of pay well in excess of the minimum for his work is assigned a low hourly rate (often the minimum) for the first hour (or the first 2 or 4 hours) of each day. This rate is designated as the regular rate: “time and one-half” based on such rate is paid for each additional hour worked during the workday. Thus, for example, an employee is arbitrarily assigned an hourly rate of $5 per hour under a contract which provides for the payment of so-called “overtime” for all hours in excess of 4 per day. Thus, for the normal or regular 8-hour day the employee would receive $20 for the first 4 hours and $30 for the remaining 4 hours; and a total of $50 for 8 hours. (This is exactly what he would receive at the straight time rate of $6.25 per hour.) On the sixth 8-hour day the employee likewise receives $50 and the employer claims to owe no additional overtime pay under the statute since he has already compensated the employee at “overtime” rates for 20 hours of the workweek.
(b) Such a division of the normal 8-hour workday into 4 straight time hours and 4 overtime hours is purely fictitious. The employee is not paid at the rate of $5 an hour and the alleged overtime rate of $7.50 per hour is not paid for overtime work. It is not geared either to hours “in excess of the employee's normal working hours or regular working hours” (section 7(e)(5) or for work “outside of the hours established in good faith * * * as the basic, normal, or regular workday” (section 7(e) (7)) and it cannot therefore qualify as an overtime rate. The regular rate of pay of the employee in this situation is $6.25 per hour and he is owed additional overtime compensation, based on this rate, for all hours in excess of the applicable maximum hours standard. This rule was settled by the Supreme Court in the case of Walling v. Helmerich & Payne, 323 U.S. 37, and its validity has been reemphasized by the definition of the term “regular rate” in section 7(e) of the Act as amended.
§ 778.502   Artificially labeling part of the regular wages a “bonus”.
(a) The term “bonus” is properly applied to a sum which is paid as an addition to total wages usually because of extra effort of one kind or another, or as a reward for loyal service or as a gift. The term is improperly applied if it is used to designate a portion of regular wages which the employee is entitled to receive under his regular wage contract.
(b) For example, if an employer has agreed to pay an employee $300 a week without regard to the number of hours worked, the regular rate of pay of the employee is determined each week by dividing the $300 salary by the number of hours worked in the week. The situation is not altered if the employer continues to pay the employee, whose applicable maximum hours standard is 40 hours, the same $300 each week but arbitrarily breaks the sum down into wages for the first 40 hours at an hourly rate of $4.80 an hour, overtime compensation at $7.20 per hour and labels the balance a “bonus” (which will vary from week to week, becoming smaller as the hours increase and vanishing entirely in any week in which the employee works 55 hours or more). The situation is in no way bettered if the employer, standing by the logic of his labels, proceeds to compute and pay overtime compensation due on this “bonus” by prorating it back over the hours of the workweek. Overtime compensation has still not been properly computed for this employee at his regular rate.
(c) An illustration of how the plan works over a 3-week period may serve to illustrate this principle more clearly:
(1) In the first week the employee whose applicable maximum hours standard is 40 hours, works 40 hours and receives $300. The books show he has received $192 (40 hours × $4.80 an hour) as wages and $108 as bonus. No overtime has been worked so no overtime compensation is due.
(2) In the second week he works 45 hours and receives $300. The books show he has received $192 for the first 40 hours and $36 (5 hours × $7.20 an hour) for the 5 hours over 40, or a total of $228 as wages, and the balance as a bonus of $72. Overtime compensation is then computed by the employer by dividing $72 by 45 hours to discover the average hourly increase resulting from the bonus—$1.60 per hour—and half this rate is paid for the 5 overtime hours—$4. This is improper. The employee's regular rate in this week is $6.67 per hour. He is owed $316.85 not $304.
(3) In the third week the employee works 50 hours and is paid $300. The books show that the employee received $192 for the first 40 hours and $72 (10 hours × $7.20 per hour) for the 10 hours over 40, for a total of $264 and the balance as a bonus of $36. Overtime pay due on the “bonus” is found to be $3.60. This is improper. The employee's regular rate in this week is $6 and he is owed $330, not $303.60.
(d) Similar schemes have been devised for piece-rate employees. The method is the same. An employee is assigned an arbitrary hourly rate (usually the minimum) and it is agreed that his straight-time and overtime earnings will be computed on this rate but that if these earnings do not amount to the sum he would have earned had his earnings been computed on a piece-rate basis of “x” cents per piece, he will be paid the difference as a “bonus.” The subterfuge does not serve to conceal the fact that this employee is actually compensated on a piece-rate basis, that there is no bonus and his regular rate is the quotient of piece-rate earnings divided by hours worked ( Walling v. Youngerman-Reynolds Hardwood Company, 325 U.S. 419).
(e) The general rule may be stated that wherever the employee is guaranteed a fixed or determinable sum as his wages each week, no part of this sum is a true bonus and the rules for determining overtime due on bonuses do not apply.
§ 778.503   Pseudo “percentage bonuses.”
As explained in § 778.210 of this part, a true bonus based on a percentage of total wages—both straight time and overtime wages—satisfies the Act's overtime requirements, if it is paid unconditionally. Such a bonus increases both straight time and overtime wages by the same percentage, and thereby includes proper overtime compensation as an arithmetic fact. Some bonuses, however, although expressed as a percentage of both straight time and overtime wages, are in fact a sham. Such bonuses, like the bonuses described in § 778.502 of this part, are generally separated out of a fixed weekly wage and usually decrease in amount in direct proportion to increases in the number of hours worked in a week in excess of 40. The hourly rate purportedly paid under such a scheme is artificially low, and the difference between the wages paid at the hourly rate and the fixed weekly compensation is labeled a percentage of wage “bonus.”
§ 778.600   Veterans' subsistence allowances.
Subsistence allowances paid under Public Law 346 (commonly known as the G.I. bill of rights) to a veteran employed in on-the-job training program work may not be used to offset the wages to which he is entitled under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The subsistence allowances provided by Public Law 346 for payment to veterans are not paid as compensation for services rendered to an employer nor are they intended as subsidy payments for such employer. In order to qualify as wages under either section 6 or section 7 of the Act, sums paid to an employee must be paid by or on behalf of the employer. Since veterans' subsistence allowances are not so paid, they may not be used to make up the minimum wage or overtime pay requirements of the Act nor are they included in the regular rate of pay under section 7.
§ 778.601   Special overtime provisions available for hospital and residential care establishments under section 7(j).
(a) The statutory provision. Section 7(j) of the Act provides, for hospital and residential care establishment employment, under prescribed conditions, an exemption from the general requirement of section 7(a) that overtime compensation be computed on a workweek basis. It permits a 14-day period to be established for the purpose of computing overtime compensation by an agreement or understanding between an employer engaged in the operation of a hospital or residential care establishment, and any of his employees employed in connection therewith. The exemption provided by section 7(j) applies:
(b) Conditions for application of exemption. As conditions for use of the 14-day period in lieu of the workweek in computing overtime, section 7(j) requires, first, an agreement or understanding between the employer and the employee before performance of the work that such period is to be used, and second, the payment to the employee of overtime compensation at a rate not less than one and one-half times his regular rate for all hours worked in excess of eight in any workday within such period and in excess of 80 during the period as a whole.
(c) The agreement or understanding. The agreement or understanding between the employer and employee to use the 14-day period for computing overtime must be entered into before the work to which it is intended to apply is performed. It may be arrived at directly with the employee or through his representative. It need not be in writing, but if it is not, a special record concerning it must be kept as required by part 516 of this chapter. The 14-day period may begin at any hour of any day of the week; it need not commence at the beginning of a calendar day. It consists of 14 consecutive 24-hour periods, at the end of which a new 14-day period begins. The election to use the 14-day period in lieu of the workweek must, like selection of an employee's workweek (§ 778.105) be with the intent to use such period permanently or for a substantial period of time. Changes from such period to the workweek and back again to take advantage of less onerous overtime pay liabilities with respect to particular work schedules under one system than under the other are not permissible.
(d) Payment for overtime under the special provisions. If the parties have the necessary agreement or understanding to use the 14-day period, computation of overtime pay on the workweek basis as provided in section 7(a) is not required so long as the employee receives overtime compensation at a rate not less than one and one-half times his regular rate of pay “for his employment in excess of 8 hours in any workday and in excess of 80 hours in such 14-day period.” Such compensation is required for all hours in such period in excess of eight in any workday or workdays therein which are worked by the employee, whether or not more than 80 hours are worked in the period. The first workday in the period, for purposes of this computation, begins at the same time as the 14-day period and ends 24 hours later. Each of the 13 consecutive 24-hour periods following constitutes an additional workday of the 14-day period. Overtime compensation at the prescribed time and one-half rate is also required for all hours worked in excess of 80 in the 14-day period, whether or not any daily overtime is worked during the first 80 hours. However, under the provisions of section 7(h) and 7(e)(5) of the Act, any payments at the premium rate for daily overtime hours within such period may be credited toward the overtime compensation due for overtime hours in excess of 80.
(e) Use of 14-day period in lieu of workweek. Where the 14-day period is used as authorized in section 7(j), such period is used in lieu of the workweek in computing the regular rate of pay of employees to whom it applies ( i.e. , those of the hospital's or residential care establishment's employees with whom the employer has elected to enter into the necessary agreement or understanding as explained in paragraph (c) of this section). With this exception, the computation of the regular rate and the application of statutory exclusions therefrom is governed by the general principles set forth in this part 778.
§ 778.602   Special overtime provisions under section 7(b).
(a) Daily and weekly overtime standards. The general overtime pay requirements of the Act provide for such pay only when the number of hours worked exceeds the standard specified for the workweek; no overtime compensation on a daily basis is required. However, section 7 of the Act, in subsection (b), provides certain partial exemptions from the general overtime provisions, each of which is conditioned upon the payment to the employee of overtime compensation at a rate not less than one and one-half times his regular rate of pay for his hours worked in the workweek in excess of daily, as well as weekly, standards specified in the subsection. Under these provisions, when an employee works in excess of both the daily and weekly maximum hours standards in any workweek for which such an exemption is claimed, he must be paid at such overtime rate for all hours worked in the workweek in excess of the applicable daily maximum or in excess of the applicable weekly maximum, whichever number of hours is greater. Thus, if his total hours of work in the workweek which are in excess of the daily maximum are 10, and his hours in excess of the weekly maximum are 8, overtime compensation is required for 10 hours, not 8.
(b) Standards under section 7(b). The partial exemptions provided by section 7(b) apply to an employee under the conditions specified in clause (1), (2), or (3) of the subsection “if such employee receives compensation for employment in excess of 12 hours in any workday, or for employment in excess of 56 hours in any workweek, as the case may be, at a rate not less than one and one-half times the regular rate at which he is employed.” As an example, suppose an employee is employed under the other conditions specified for an exemption under section 7(b) at an hourly rate of $5.20 and works the following schedule:
Number of overtime hours: Daily, 5 (hours over 12); weekly, 12 (hours over 56).
§ 778.603   Special overtime provisions for certain employees receiving remedial education under section 7(q).
Section 7(q) of the Act, enacted as part of the 1989 Amendments, provides an exemption from the overtime pay requirements for time spent by certain employees who are receiving remedial education. The exemption provided by section 7(q), as implemented by these regulations, allows any employer to require that an employee spend up to 10 hours in the aggregate in any workweek in remedial education without payment of overtime compensation provided that the employee lacks a high school diploma or educational attainment at the eighth-grade level; the remedial education is designed to provide reading and other basic skills at an eighth-grade level or below, or to fulfill the requirements for a high school diploma or General Educational Development (GED) certificate; and the remedial education does not include job-specific training. Employees must be compensated at their regular rate of pay for the time spent receiving such remedial education. The employer must maintain a record of the hours that an employee is engaged each workday and each workweek in receiving remedial education, and the compensation paid each pay period for the time so engaged, as described in 29 CFR 516.34. The remedial education must be conducted during discrete periods of time set aside for such a program, and, to the maximum extent practicable, away from the employee's normal work station. An employer has the burden to establish compliance with all applicable requirements of this special overtime provision as set forth in section 7(q) of the Act and in this section of the regulations. Section 7(q) is solely an exemption from the overtime provisions of section 7(a) of the Act. It is not an exemption from the requirements of any other law that regulates employment practices, including the standards that are used to select individuals for employment. An employer creating a remedial education program pursuant to section 7(q) should be mindful not to violate other applicable requirements. See, for example, title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2000e et seq. ; Executive Order 11246, as amended, 3 CFR part 339 (1964-1965 Compilation), reprinted in 42 U.S.C. 2000e note; the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. 701 et seq. ; and the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures published at 41 CFR part 60-3.