October 22, 2010

HR Fact Friday: Legal Static Over Issuing Smart Phones to Workers

Filed under: Compensation,Legal Issues,Work/Life Balance — Tags: , , , — Paul @ 7:42 am

For the past three years, the Chicago Police Department has handed powerful new tools to officers in the field—BlackBerry smart phones. But the BlackBerry may have backfired on the department, which is now being sued by a sergeant in the gang investigations unit for the overtime he claims he earned while using his smart phone off the clock.

The department “has willfully violated the FLSA [Fair Labor Standards Act] by intentionally failing and refusing to pay Plaintiff and other similarly situated employees all compensation due them under the FLSA” for their after-hours Blackberry use, Sgt. Jeffrey Allen said in a suit filed in May as a proposed class action. A judge has to certify the case as a class action for it to proceed.

The case is one of a handful nationwide in which employees have claimed overtime pay for smart-phone use—and apparently the first involving public employees. But lawyers say such cases are a clear warning to employers to put a smart-phone usage policy in place before they end up in potentially costly litigation. Smart phones “are very dangerous and risky for nonexempt employees to have if you’re worried about overtime,” says Jeremy A. Roth, a partner at San Diego law firm Littler Mendelson.

“Clearly there’s a tremendous benefit to being able to access work remotely,” says Howard S. Lavin, an attorney at the law firm Stroock & Stroock & Lavan in New York. “It’s a fabulous tool. The problem is when you take technology and apply it to longstanding laws, there are unintended consequences.”

Employers can minimize the risk of litigation by restricting smart-phone use to exempt employees or by instructing nonexempt employees to take calls from customers or clients only during regular work hours.

Under the FLSA, nonexempt employees are entitled to overtime compensation for “time spent working” beyond a 40-hour workweek. An employee does not even need to be required by the employer to work overtime but must merely do so for the employer’s benefit.

Source: Mathew Heller, workforce.com, Sept. 2010

Share

April 9, 2010

HR Fact Friday: Special HR Alert for Financial Institutions

Filed under: Employment Law — Tags: , , , , — Paul @ 7:09 am

Mortgage Loan Officer Doesn’t Meet Administrative Exemption 

Your World Just Got More Confusing

As if your HR world isn’t perplexing enough, the Department of Labor (DOL) has abandoned its former position (Opinion Letter, FLSA 2006-31) that mortgage loan officers could potentially qualify as exempt employees under the Administrative test of the Fair Labor Standards Act.  In a new “Administrator’s Interpretation” the DOL concludes that the earlier Opinion was based on an inappropriate assumption, that mortgage loan officers provide work directly related to an organization’s business operations.  The consequence for employers is that mortgage loan officers will generally be required to be treated as nonexempt and paid overtime.

(more…)

Share

April 24, 2009

HR Fact Friday: Wage and Hour Division Is Hiring

Filed under: Hiring & Jobs — Tags: , , , , , , , , — Paul @ 7:58 am

It’s not all bad employment news this week. Nor is it bad news for workers who have a grievance against their employer and plan to file a wage related complaint. The Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division is hiring . . . in fact they will be adding 250 investigators, a staff increase of more than a third, announced U.S. Secretary of Labor, Hilda L. Solis.

 

Solis made the announcement after the release of a Governmental Accountability Office (GAO) report that found the department’s system for receiving and responding to wage and hour complaints is ineffective and discourages wage-theft complaints.

 

Of the 250 new investigators, 100 will focus on contractor compliance under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the economic stimulus package.

(more…)

Share

December 11, 2008

California Labor Laws Affect Other Western States

Filed under: Legal Issues — Tags: , , , , , — Jane @ 8:51 am

Think you are safe from California’s employee-friendly labor laws just because some of your employees who sometimes work there don’t actually live there? Think again!

Like Dickens’ Ghost of Christmas Present, California’s laws may come to haunt you in the here and now if you’re not careful. A recent decision from the federal appeals court with jurisdiction over California has ruled that California’s overtime laws may apply to employees who lived in Arizona and Colorado, but who worked for temporary periods of time in California.

The employees were trainers for a large computer company who trained California clients for time periods ranging from several weeks to several months. Their employer also had a corporate presence in California and other employees who lived and worked there.

The federal appeals court concluded that these facts were enough to subject the visiting employees to rules like daily overtime pay for work in California of a day or longer. Consider the implications of this decision as you send your employees off to work in California.

Share