Source: http://zomichiganemploymentlaw.wnj.com/?m=201401
Timestamp: 2018-10-17 14:31:12
Document Index: 358014096

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 785', '§ 785', '§ 790', '§ 785', '§ 785', '§ 785', '§ 541', '§ 541']

Michigan Employment Law » 2014 » January
I Do! Waiting to be Engaged or Being Engaged to wait under the FLSA
January 31st, 2014 Comments Off on I Do! Waiting to be Engaged or Being Engaged to wait under the FLSA
Yea, I know, it’s not that kind of engaged, but you have to admit that was a little funny. No? OK, let’s move away from the general concept of suffering and permitting to work and talk about some specific issues in determining what amounts to working time. A lot of employers have employees who spend significant periods of time during the work day doing nothing productive. Many employers have employees who are on call or who wear a pager (see, I really am that old) or carry a cell phone as part of their duties after their normal work hours. So the question is, when is an employee on duty – that is, working and entitled to compensation – and when are they not? This is one of the areas that the regulations do a pretty good job of putting some boundaries around. What is referred to as “waiting to be engaged” and “being engaged to wait”?
Whether waiting time is time worked under the Act depends upon particular circumstances. The determination involves ‘scrutiny and construction of the agreements between particular parties, appraisal of their practical construction of the working agreement by conduct, consideration of the nature of the service, and its relation to the waiting time, and all of the circumstances. Facts may show that the employee was engaged to wait or they may show that he waited to be engaged.’ (Skidmore v. Swift, 323 U.S. 134 (1944)) Such questions ‘must be determined in accordance with common sense and the general concept of work or employment.’ (Central Mo. Tel. Co. v. Conwell, 170 F. 2d 641 (C.A. 8, 1948).)
29 CFR § 785.14.
Early in the history of the FLSA, some employers tried to avoid paying employees who were not doing any productive work during the workday. Let’s get that one out of the way right now, the regulations make it clear that time during the work day that an employee spends sitting around waiting for something to do is compensable even if the employee is doing something for his or her own enjoyment or benefit.
A stenographer who reads a book while waiting for dictation, a messenger who works a crossword puzzle while awaiting assignments, fireman who plays checkers while waiting for alarms and a factory worker who talks to his fellow employees while waiting for machinery to be repaired are all working during their periods of inactivity. The rule also applies to employees who work away from the plant. For example, a repair man is working while he waits for his employer’s customer to get the premises in readiness. The time is work time even though the employee is allowed to leave the premises or the job site during such periods of inactivity. The periods during which these occur are unpredictable. They are usually of short duration. In either event the employee is unable to use the time effectively for his own purposes. It belongs to and is controlled by the employer. In all of these cases waiting is an integral part of the job. The employee is engaged to wait. (See: Skidmore v. Swift, 323 U.S. 134, 137 (1944); Wright v. Carrigg, 275 F. 2d 448, 14 W.H. Cases (C.A. 4, 1960); Mitchell v. Wigger, 39 Labor Cases, para. 66,278, 14 W.H. Cases 534 (D.N.M. 1960); Mitchell v. Nicholson, 179 F. Supp, 292,14 W.H. Cases 487 (W.D.N.C. 1959).)
29 CFR § 785.15.
And that seems pretty clear and pretty straightforward. The courts have been pretty clear on this too and have found that things like standing around waiting for a machine to be fixed, or a waitress sitting in a restaurant waiting for customers to come in, or a truck driver waiting for his truck to be loaded at his destination so he can return to his home base is all compensable time. And that is all time that we would normally call “idle time” during the employee’s normal workday. And that, by the way, is going to make me take a small step back and let’s define the “workday.” The FLSA does not have a definition of “workday,” but the Portal-to-Portal Act does.
(b) “Workday” as used in the Portal-to-Portal Act means, in general, the period between the commencement and completion on the same workday of an employee’s principal activity or activities. It includes all time within that period whether or not the employee engages in work throughout all of that period.
29 CFR § 790.6.
Generally, any idle time that occurs within the workday is compensable time and must be counted as hours worked, but not all the time. For example, the regulations do allow for what we would now call a “split shift.” You know what I mean, an employee comes to work, works several hours, is relieved from duty for a couple of hours and then comes back and finishes out the day. Happens in restaurants all the time where there are, say, lunch and dinner rushes that require higher levels of staffing than during the rest of the day. So given the definition of workday and the rule on idle time during the workday, how do employers get away with this?
29 CFR § 785.16(a).
So, when an employee is sitting around during the work day waiting for work to do and is not free to leave and do what they want, the employee is “engaged to wait” and must be paid for that time. On the other hand, if the employee is free to leave and do what they want after starting the workday but before coming back to finish it off, like with a split shift, the employee is “waiting to be engaged” and does not have to be paid. The regs give a couple of specific examples involving truck drivers:
A truck driver who has to wait at or near the job site for goods to be loaded is working during the loading period. If the driver reaches his destination and while awaiting the return trip is required to take care of his employer’s property, he is also working while waiting. In both cases the employee is engaged to wait. Waiting is an integral part of the job. On the other hand, for example, if the truck driver is sent from Washington, DC to New York City, leaving at 6 a.m. and arriving at 12 noon, and is completely and specifically relieved from all duty until 6 p.m. when he again goes on duty for the return trip the idle time is not working time. He is waiting to be engaged. (Skidmore v. Swift, 323 U.S. 134, 137 (1944); Walling v. Dunbar Transfer & Storage, 3 W.H. Cases 284; 7 Labor Cases para. 61,565 (W.D. Tenn. 1943); Gifford v. Chapman, 6 W.H. Cases 806; 12 Labor Cases para. 63,661 (W.D. Okla., 1947); Thompson v. Daugherty, 40 Supp. 279 (D. Md. 1941).)
29 CFR § 785.16(b).
What about an employee who is now done with his or her regular workday but is now required to be “on call”?
An employee who is required to remain on call on the employer’s premises or so close thereto that he cannot use the time effectively for his own purposes is working while “on call”. An employee who is not required to remain on the employer’s premises but is merely required to leave word at his home or with company officials where he may be reached is not working while on call. (Armour & Co. v. Wantock, 323 U.S. 126 (1944); Handler v. Thrasher, 191 F. 2d 120 (C.A. 10, 1951); Walling v. Bank of Waynesboro, Georgia, 61 F. Supp. 384 (S.D. Ga. 1945))
29 CFR § 785.17.
Seems simple enough, right? Well not so fast. You see, generally the test that is applied to determine if on call time is compensable is fact specific and involves an analysis of whether the employee can use the time effectively for his or her own purposes. Some of the things that courts will look at in determining if an employee can use the on call time for his or her own purposes are if the employee is required to be on the employer’s premises during the on call time, if there are excessive geographical restrictions to what the employee can do, and if the frequency of calls makes it difficult for the employee to use the time for his or her own purposes. Not all restrictions on an employee’s activities make the time compensable. For example, it is generally the rule that prohibiting an employee from drinking alcohol while on call alone does not make the on call time hours worked.
Here is what we do know – whether the on call time is compensable is a highly fact specific inquiry, so if you are going to make people take on call shifts and you don’t want to pay them, check with your labor lawyer first.
January 24th, 2014 Comments Off on Hours Worked: To Suffer or Permit. . . . Who Talks Like That?
January 17th, 2014 Comments Off on Where to Start? How About, What Exactly Does the FLSA Do?
Before I even get started with this post I want to talk about “engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce.” These are the basic FLSA jurisdictional requirements. No number of employee provisions like in Title VII or the ADA or the FMLA. What that means, especially in this day and age, is that almost every employer in the United States is covered by the FLSA. You have to be pretty small or specifically exempted not to be covered. So keep that in mind as we move along.
January 15th, 2014 Comments Off on “I QUIT!!!” There’s an app for that too!?!
That Nice Unconstitutional Bill
January 10th, 2014 Comments Off on That Nice Unconstitutional Bill
“When he felt the time was ripe, President Roosevelt asked Secretary of Labor Perkins, ‘What happened to that nice unconstitutional bill you had tucked away?’” http://www.dol.gov/oasam/programs/history/flsa1938.htm
I thought we would start this little adventure through the Fair Labor Standards Act with some history of the Act. On June 25, 1938, the FLSA (FLSA and the Act is how we are going to identify the Fair Labor Standards Act throughout this series), along with 120 other bills, was signed into law by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Yes, I said 120+ bills signed into law on a single day. The current government in Washington can’t agree on 120 words let alone 120 separate pieces of legislation. The FLSA was part of President Roosevelt’s New Deal. Whatever your feelings about the New Deal and Roosevelt’s threat to “pack the court” if they did not come around to his way of thinking, there can be no doubt that this was the beginning of a program of legislation that would fundamentally alter the way business was done in Washington and, some say, fundamentally change the role of the federal government.[1] It certainly changed the role of the federal government with respect to regulation of the employment relationship.
As originally written the FLSA banned “oppressive child labor,” set a minimum hourly wage of $.25 per hour and established an overtime work week of 44 hours. At the time it was passed, the FLSA only applied to about 20% of the national workforce. Just to give you some context on what all of this meant in terms of real spending power, in 1938 when the FLSA was signed by President Roosevelt, the average new home in the United States cost $3,900, a new car cost about $760 and a loaf of bread could be had for $.04. By 1945, the year WW II ended and the troops started to come home, the FLSA provided for a $.40 per hour minimum wage and a maximum overtime work week of 40 hours.
While the bones of the original FLSA remain basically unchanged, the Act has been amended numerous times over the years. Most notably, the 1963 amendments added the Equal Pay Act and the 2004 amendments changed some of the definitions of exempt employees. Recently, in 2007, there was an increase in the minimum wage, and the FLSA was amended in part by the Affordable Care Act signed by President Obama.
So, as we go forward we will be talking about several things that make up what we will ultimately refer to as the law of wages and hours at the federal level. There is the Fair Labor Standards Act itself, find it at http://www.dol.gov/whd/regs/statutes/FairLaborStandAct.pdf. Then there are the regulations, which we already said we would be using as our road map as we go along. Find them at http://www.dol.gov/dol/cfr/Title_29/Chapter_V.htm. From time to time we will be referring to case law—the opinions of the various federal courts interpreting the law and regulations. And finally we will refer to “opinion letters”, opinion letters being the interpretations of the law and regulations issued by the Department of Labor. While these don’t have the force of law, the courts do defer to them and will rely on them occasionally when making decisions.
So next week, we will get down to business.
[1] See http://www.dol.gov/oasam/programs/history/flsa1938.htm. If you are into the history of stuff like this like I am, Jonathan Grossman on the DOL website has written a short and really well done history of the FLSA if you want more details about what lead up to its passage.
The Roads are Bad, The Office is Closed, Who Do I Pay? A Blizzard Re-Run.
January 06th, 2014 Comments Off on The Roads are Bad, The Office is Closed, Who Do I Pay? A Blizzard Re-Run.
Sometimes you just get a break. It took me an hour to get out of my driveway again today. It is a repeat of the storm we had in 2011, only it is a lot colder. At least it seems like it is. And for me that is a great thing. Not because I like snow, I don’t. In fact, the older I get the more I hate it. I need to move south. It is a great thing because I get to go back and repeat something I wrote three years ago. Why do I get to do that you ask? Because just like three years ago, I know you are asking yourself: “What do I do about pay for all of the employees who didn’t come to work today?” I mean, a bunch of them are home because they did not want to brave the bad roads, and a bunch of them are home because their kids don’t have school. And a bunch of them are home because you closed your business for the day. So what do you do about pay for people who didn’t come to work today? What does the law say? Well, if you don’t want to read on and find out, you can see the original post here. Or, plow on (sorry, that was really bad).
For non-exempt employees, the answer is easy. Under the Fair Labor Standards Act, if non-exempt employees do not work, you don’t have to pay them. It is as simple as that. It does not matter if they don’t work because they couldn’t navigate the bad roads or because their kids didn’t have school or because you closed the business. Under the law if they don’t work, you don’t have to pay them. (Now you might have a policy that says something different and you might have a state law you have to deal with and that is a different law all together. We are just talking about the FLSA here, so before you do anything, check your company policies and your state law.)
Furthermore, an employer may not make deductions “for absences occasioned by the employer or by the operating requirements of the business.” If the employer closes operations due to a weather related emergency or other disaster for less than a full work week, then the employer must pay an exempt employee “the full salary for any week in which the employee performs any work without regard to the number of days or hours worked,” because “deductions may not be made for time when work is not available.” See 29 C.F.R. § 541.602(a)(emphasis added).
The Department of Labor considers an absence due to adverse weather conditions, such as when transportation difficulties experienced during a snow emergency cause an employee to choose not to report for work for the day even though the employer is open for business, an absence for personal reasons. Such an absence does not constitute an absence due to sickness or disability. Thus . . . an employer that remains open for business during a weather emergency may lawfully deduct one full-day’s absence from the salary of an exempt employee who does not report for work for the day due to the adverse weather conditions . . . . Please note, however, that deductions from salary for less than a full-day’s absence are not permitted for such reasons under the regulations. See 29 C.F.R. § 541.602(b)(1)(emphasis added).
That seems pretty clear too. If the business is open and the exempt employee does not work for the full day, you don’t have to pay. Notice I said “does not work” and not “does not come to work.” And that is because I have one big caveat for you. Just because an employee is not at the office, that does not mean he is not working. An employee sitting at home answering emails and taking calls is working and would have to be paid. So, make sure the employee is really not working before you start making pay deductions.
So, I hope you all are warm and safe. Sit in front of the fire, have a hot beverage of your choice and watch as mother nature keeps on shaking up the snow globe.
Time to Start Over . . . Sort of.
January 03rd, 2014 Comments Off on Time to Start Over . . . Sort of.
Last week I went back and looked at what I had written last year. Wow, not much. In fact, I haven’t posted since October. Must be that there just wasn’t that much that was overly interesting or relevant at least in my opinion. So I sat at my desk for a while on a Saturday and gave some serious thought to this whole blog thing. Do I want to keep doing this and if so, how can I do it in a way that is helpful to you and interesting for both of us? And of course by both of us I mean me and the one other person who reads this thing on a regular basis. I also want to try to keep the tone of the blog. I have tried to be entertaining as well as informative as I have done this thing, and I am going to keep trying to do that.
Having given all of this some thought, what I thought I would do is concentrate this year on one law and its application and I would try to post on a more regular schedule. Of course, if something earth shaking happens in the area of labor or employment law we will do posts on that too, so this is not going to be a “single issue” blog. There are lots of those out there already and many of them are really good, probably better than I could do. But what I am trying to do is to try to at least interject some discipline into my writing and posting schedules. I’m going to try to do one of these a week for the entire year. No promises on that mind you, I never know what my schedule is going to look like, but I’m going to give it a shot.
So what am I going to write about you ask? Well, I thought I would take a look at the Fair Labor Standards Act. It applies to virtually all of your businesses and it is very often misunderstood and misapplied. We will touch on some basic issues as we go along and get into some of the more complex issues too. I’m going to use the regulations as a roadmap as we walk through the statue. You can find them at http://www.dol.gov/dol/cfr/Title_29/Chapter_V.htm When you go look at the index of the regulations on the DOL website, the first thing you notice is that there does not seem to be any rhyme or reason to the organization of the regs. No organization in a government project? What a shock. Next you are going to tell me that the government website to sign up for healthcare doesn’t work very well. Impossible. I will try to organize my posts in a way that I think is logical and useful to you despite the apparent lack of organization in the regulations. And we will start next week.
And that is what we are going to do for the upcoming year. Hope you stick around for it.