August 14, 2022

Volume XII, Number 226

Advertisement
Advertisement

August 12, 2022

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

August 11, 2022

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis
Advertisement

Indiana Court of Appeals Overturns Employer's Common Construction Wage Victory

We rarely see reported decisions on the common construction wage, so William Wressell v. R.L. Turner Corporation caught our eye. In this case, the Indiana Court of Appeals this month ruled that summary judgment was inappropriately entered for an employer on an employee’s claim that he was paid under the wrong job classification.

Two items are of some note in the opinion. First, the trial court had struck from the summary judgment record eight paragraphs from the affidavit of a field auditor with the Indiana Department of Labor finding those paragraphs to be irrelevant and full of legal conclusions. In those paragraphs, the field auditor set forth the audit guidelines used by Indiana’s DOL as well as items which cannot be included in the fringe benefit calculation under the Indiana common construction wage.

On appeal, the Court of Appeals found that ruling to be improper and reversed noting that the information in the affidavit was “unquestionably relevant” to the summary judgment. Secondly, the Court of Appeals said that it was an open question as to whether the employee had been properly paid for the work he did. The Court acknowledged that it seemed “obvious that there would be considerable overlap between job classifications on any CCWA job site” but that it is not the case that “a cement mason is instantly transformed into a carpenter simply because he may perform a task that a carpenter also performs.”

The summary judgment entered for the employer was thus overturned and the case was returned to the trial court for determination as to whether Wressell, who was paid as a skilled cement mason, should have had hours instead paid to him at the higher rates available for a skilled carpenter or a skilled laborer. In addition, the trial court will be required to examine how the employer credited payments to the employee’s fringe benefit calculation, specifically determining whether Wressell had been properly paid for his fringe benefits.

© 2022 BARNES & THORNBURG LLPNational Law Review, Volume III, Number 122
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

About this Author

Gerald Lutkus, Barnes Thornburg Law Firm, South Bend, Labor and Employment Attorney,
Partner

Gerald F. (Jerry) Lutkus is a partner in the South Bend office of Barnes & Thornburg LLP where he is a member of the firm’s Labor and Employment Law and Litigation Departments. He practices in the areas of labor and employment law counseling and litigation, arbitration, collective bargaining, and media law. Mr. Lutkus has been recognized on the Indiana Super Lawyers list for his work in labor and employment Law. The Best Lawyers in America has recognized Mr. Lutkus for over 10 years for his work in commercial litigation, employment law - management...

574-237-1118
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement