Opinion ID: 2639132
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: minimum wage act

Text: Our MWA, chapter 49.46 RCW, generally requires an employer to pay employees a certain minimum hourly wage and compensate them for time worked in excess of 40 hours in a given work week at a rate of at least one and one-half times the employees' regular wage rate. [28] The MWA, however, exempts from this requirement certain classes of employees, including [a]ny individual employed in a bona fide ... professional capacity. [29] The Act does not define professional, but grants the Department of Labor and Industries (DLI) authority to define[ ] and delimit[ ] the term. [30] Under the DLI's definition of professional, published in Washington Administrative Code (WAC) XXX-XXX-XXX, an employee is exempt from the MWA if the employee fulfills certain duties [31] and is compensated on a salary or fee basis. [32] WAC 296-128-530 states that: The term individual employed in a bona fide ... professional capacity in RCW 49.46.010(5)(c) shall mean any employee: (1) Whose primary duty consists of the performance of work: (a) Requiring knowledge of an advanced type in a field of science or learning customarily acquired by a prolonged course of specialized intellectual instruction and study, as distinguished from a general academic education and from an apprenticeship, and from training in the performance of routine mental, manual, or physical processes, or (b) Original and creative in character in a recognized field of artistic endeavor (as opposed to work which can be produced by a person endowed with general manual or intellectual ability and training), and the result of which depends primarily on the intention, imagination, or talent of the employee; or (c) Teaching, tutoring, instructing, or lecturing in the activity of imparting knowledge and who is employed and engaged in this activity as a teacher in the school system or educational establishment or institution by which he is employed; and (2) Whose work requires the consistent exercise of discretion and judgment in its performance; and (3) Whose work is predominantly intellectual and varied in character (as opposed to routine mental, manual, mechanical or physical work) and is of such a character that the output produced or the result accomplished cannot be standardized in relation to a given period of time; and (4) Who does not devote more than 20 percent of his hours worked in the work week to activities which are not an essential part of and necessarily incident to the work described in paragraphs (1) through (3) of this section; and (5) Who is compensated for his services on a salary or fee basis at a rate of not less than $170 per week exclusive of board, lodging, or facilities: Provided, That this paragraph (5) shall not apply in the case of an employee who is the holder of a valid license or certificate permitting the practice of law, medicine, or dentistry and who is actually engaged in the practice thereof: Provided, That an employee who is compensated on a salary or fee basis at a rate of not less than $250 per week (exclusive of board, lodging, or other facilities), and whose primary duty consists of the performance of work either requiring knowledge of an advanced type in a field of science or learning, which includes work requiring the consistent exercise of discretion and judgment, or requiring invention, imagination, or talent in a recognized field of artistic endeavor, shall be deemed to meet all of the requirements of this section. [ [33] ] Neither the MWA nor the WAC defines the term salary or fee basis. [34] However, because the MWA is based upon the federal Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (FLSA), [35] this court has looked to federal authority for guidance in defining salary basis. In Drinkwitz we adopted, in part, an administrative regulation promulgated by the United States Department of Labor (DOL) under the authority of the FLSA which defines the term salary basis as follows: (a) An employee will be considered to be paid on a salary basis within the meaning of the regulations if under his employment agreement he regularly receives each pay period on a weekly, or less frequent basis, a predetermined amount constituting all or part of his compensation, which amount is not subject to reduction because of variations in the quality or quantity of the work performed. Subject to the exceptions provided below, the employee must receive his full salary for any week in which he performs any work without regard to the number of days or hours worked. This policy is also subject to the general rule that an employee need not be paid for any workweek in which he performs no work.[ [36] ] Under the test adopted by this court, an employee is compensated on a salary basis if the employee regularly receives each pay period a predetermined amount, not subject to reduction because of variations in the quality or quantity of work performed. [37] In adopting the federal test, this court emphasized that narrowly applying the definition of salary as promulgated by the DOL renders a result consistent with Washington's long and proud history of being a pioneer in the protection of employee rights. [38] Because the MWA is a remedial act, its exemptions, such as the professional exemption claimed in this case, are to be narrowly construed. [39] An employer bears the burden of proving its employees fall within an exempted category of the Act. [40]