Court Opinion

ID: 9473976
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 04:44:58.146579+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:43:50.687416
License: Public Domain

CLARK, Chief Judge,
dissenting:
I respectfully dissent. The Secretary could determine that “bonus” payments at issue were not paid under the exclusion provided by 29 U.S.C. § 207(e)(5) for “certain hours worked ... because such hours are hours worked in excess of eight in a day or in excess of the maximum [40 hours] workweek ... or in excess of the employee’s normal ... or regular working hours.” As the majority opinion discloses in footnote 2, the “bonus” was paid for a pattern of behavior during the hours that were worked. As such, the Secretary could determine as he did that it must qualify for exemption, if at all, under 29 U.S.C. § 207(e)(3). This bonus exemption provision requires that the fact and amount of such payment be determined: (1) at the sole discretion of the employer, (2) at or near the end of the period, and (3) not pursuant to any prior agreement. Such a true bonus arrangement would not have served the ends of the employer, which clearly were to minimize crew disruption and maximize the efficiency of its personnel. Thus, the proper exemption provision required that it be offered in a definite, calculable sum in advance of the work week and the choice to enjoy it be placed within the employee’s discretion. I would affirm the Secretary.