IV 
115TH CONGRESS 
1ST SESSION 
H. CON. RES. 68 
Expressing the sense of Congress that the overtime rule published in the 
Federal Register by the Secretary of Labor on May 23, 2016, would 
provide millions of workers with greater economic security and was a 
legally valid exercise of the authority of the Secretary under the Fair 
Labor Standards Act of 1938. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
JUNE 29, 2017 
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia (for himself, Mr. TAKANO, Mr. POCAN, Ms. NORTON, 
Mr. CONYERS, Mrs. NAPOLITANO, Ms. LEE, Mr. DESAULNIER, Ms. WIL-
SON of Florida, Mr. NORCROSS, Ms. SCHAKOWSKY, Mr. COURTNEY, Ms. 
DELAURO, Mr. ESPAILLAT, Mr. LEVIN, Mr. SWALWELL of California, 
Mr. PALLONE, Ms. FUDGE, Mr. AL GREEN of Texas, Mr. GRIJALVA, Mr. 
CROWLEY, Ms. CLARKE of New York, Mr. JEFFRIES, Mr. ELLISON, Mr. 
PASCRELL, Mr. POLIS, Mr. HECK, Mr. CUMMINGS, Ms. BONAMICI, Mr. 
GUTIE´RREZ, and Ms. ADAMS) submitted the following concurrent resolu-
tion; which was referred to the Committee on Education and the Work-
force 
CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 
Expressing the sense of Congress that the overtime rule 
published in the Federal Register by the Secretary of 
Labor on May 23, 2016, would provide millions of work-
ers with greater economic security and was a legally 
valid exercise of the authority of the Secretary under 
the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. 
Whereas the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 
201 et seq.) established overtime compensation require-
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
03:59 Jun 30, 2017
Jkt 069200
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6300
E:\BILLS\HC68.IH
HC68
SSpencer on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with BILLS
•HCON 68 IH 
ments for certain employees when they work more than 
40 hours in a given workweek; 
Whereas under section 13(a)(1) of the Fair Labor Standards 
Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 213(a)(1)), Congress delegated 
to the Secretary of Labor the authority to define and de-
limit the terms relating to the exemption for bona fide 
executive, administrative, and professional employees 
(commonly known as the ‘‘white collar exemption’’); 
Whereas for more than 75 years, the Secretary of Labor has 
exercised its delegated authority to issue regulations that 
define and delimit the terms relating to the white collar 
exemption by applying a duties test and applying a min-
imum compensation level or salary threshold; 
Whereas the Secretary of Labor began utilizing a salary 
threshold in the initial regulations defining and delim-
iting the terms relating to the white collar exemption, 
which were first issued in 1938; 
Whereas Congress has long approved the use of a salary 
threshold by the Secretary of Labor, as demonstrated by 
the fact that Congress has amended the Fair Labor 
Standards Act of 1938 at least 10 times since 1938 and 
has not precluded the Secretary from using a salary 
threshold; 
Whereas the salary threshold became woefully out of date and 
ineffective as a result of not being sufficiently updated to 
keep pace with a changing economy, as evidenced by the 
fact that more than half of all full-time salaried workers 
were covered by the salary threshold in 1975 and only 8 
percent of these workers were covered by the salary 
threshold in 2015; 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
03:59 Jun 30, 2017
Jkt 069200
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6300
E:\BILLS\HC68.IH
HC68
SSpencer on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with BILLS
•HCON 68 IH 
Whereas the salary threshold of $455 per week, or $23,660 
per year, that was in effect on May 22, 2016, was below 
the poverty line for a family of 4; 
Whereas the Secretary of Labor updated the salary threshold 
on May 23, 2016, through a final rule entitled ‘‘Defining 
and Delimiting the Exemptions for Executive, Adminis-
trative, Professional, Outside Sales and Computer Em-
ployees’’ (81 Fed. Reg. 32391) by increasing the salary 
threshold to the 40th percentile of earnings of full-time 
salaried employees in the lowest-wage Census Region, re-
sulting in a salary threshold of $913 per week or $47,476 
per year; 
Whereas the final rule would benefit more than 13,000,000 
employees by providing overtime compensation protec-
tions to 4,200,000 new employees and strengthening 
overtime compensation protections for 8,900,000 addi-
tional employees; 
Whereas the Secretary of Labor went through a thorough 
process in crafting the final rule, seeking public input 
and conducting extensive economic analysis, including— 
(1) spending more than a year meeting with more 
than 200 interested parties to obtain input before issuing 
the proposed rule in 2015; 
(2) considering more than 270,000 comments re-
ceived during the 60-day public comment period on the 
proposed rule; and 
(3) making significant changes in response to public 
input before issuing the final rule; 
Whereas the public comments submitted to the Secretary of 
Labor regarding the proposed rule were overwhelmingly 
positive and supportive of the rule; 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
03:59 Jun 30, 2017
Jkt 069200
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6300
E:\BILLS\HC68.IH
HC68
SSpencer on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with BILLS
•HCON 68 IH 
Whereas the increase in the salary threshold, included in the 
final rule, to the 40th percentile of earnings of full-time 
salaried employees in the lowest-wage Census Region, re-
sulting in a threshold of $913 per week or $47,476 per 
year, was a strong yet measured increase by almost any 
measure, including as compared to— 
(1) the higher salary threshold of $970 per week or 
$50,440 per year, initially put forward by the Secretary 
of Labor in the proposed rule; 
(2) the salary threshold of $984 per week or 
$51,168 per year, which would be necessary to fully ac-
count for the erosion to the value of the salary threshold 
since 1975 due to inflation; 
(3) the salary threshold of $1,122 per week or 
$58,344 per year, which would be necessary to cover the 
same share of all salaried workers as were covered in 
1975 after accounting for changes in the economy; and 
(4) the salary threshold of $1,327 per week or 
$69,004 per year, which would be necessary to cover the 
same percentage of all salaried workers as were covered 
in 1975; 
Whereas the United States District Court for the Eastern 
District of Texas erroneously called the authority of the 
Secretary of Labor under the Fair Labor Standards Act 
of 1938 into question when it issued a preliminary in-
junction enjoining the Department of Labor from enforc-
ing the final overtime rule; and 
Whereas millions of workers eagerly await a fair day’s pay 
for a hard day’s work: Now, therefore, be it 
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that the final 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
03:59 Jun 30, 2017
Jkt 069200
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\HC68.IH
HC68
SSpencer on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with BILLS
•HCON 68 IH 
rule issued on May 23, 2016, by the Secretary of Labor 
entitled ‘‘Defining and Delimiting the Exemptions for Ex-
ecutive, Administrative, Professional, Outside Sales and 
Computer Employees’’ (81 Fed. Reg. 32391)— 
(1) would provide more than 13,000,000 work-
ers with greater economic security; 
(2) was created through the legally valid exer-
cise of the congressionally delegated authority of the 
Secretary of Labor under the Fair Labor Standards 
Act of 1938; and 
(3) should be defended and enforced with due 
haste. 
Æ 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
03:59 Jun 30, 2017
Jkt 069200
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6301
E:\BILLS\HC68.IH
HC68
SSpencer on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with BILLS