Opinion ID: 775086
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Time Spent on Management Duties

Text: 35 The Baldwins claim that they spent ninety percent of their time on nonexempt duties. The Baldwins present the following evidence: (1) their declarations attesting to a considerable amount of overtime labor with the vast majority of the their workweek spent on manual labor; (2) the list of manual labor responsibilities outlined in the agreement including cleaning, maintenance, and repair of the park's facilities; and (3) checklists and worksheets indicating the Baldwins' regular completion of manual work. 36 Under the FLSA's regulations, the maintenance and cleaning of the park is classified as nonexempt work. See 29 C.F.R. §§ 541.102. 6 However, the interviewing, selecting and training of employees; setting hours for and planning and directing work; evaluating and disciplining employees; and maintaining the safety of the employees and the park are all exempt activities. See id. 37 We must accept on summary judgment the Baldwins' assertion, supported by the record, that they spent more than fifty percent of the time on manual tasks that are plainly non-exempt. In interpreting the primary duty requirement, although the percentage of time spent on nonexempt tasks is relevant, it is not alone dispositive. 29 C.F.R.§§ 541.103. We do not presume that the executive exemption fails merely because the proportion of time spent on exempt managerial tasks is less than fifty percent, where, as here, managerial duties are packaged in employment with non-managerial tasks, and the management function cannot readily and economically be separated from the nonexempt tasks. Cf. Donovan v. Burger King Corp., 672 F.2d 221, 226 (1st Cir. 1982) (Burger King I) (in concluding that Burger King assistant managers had management as their primary duty, the court reasoned that a strict time division is somewhat misleading here: one can still be `managing' if one is in charge, even while physically doing something else. The 50 percent rule seems better directed at situations where the employee's management and non-management functions are more clearly severable than they are here.). 38 Therefore, we will weigh the other considerations listed in §§ 541.103 and the facts unique to this case to determine whether the Baldwins' primary duty was management.