December 7, 2021

Volume XI, Number 341

Advertisement
Advertisement

December 06, 2021

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

Quicken Loans Wins Unexpected Overtime Victory

For several years, the financial industry has closely watched the controversy surrounding the issue of whether mortgage loan officers are exempt from the overtime requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) under the "administrative exemption." An unexpected victory for Quicken Loans last week in a Detroit federal court highlights the continuing uncertainty over this issue.

On March 17, a federal court jury in Detroit found that 400 Quicken Loan mortgage loan officers seeking overtime pay, in fact, did qualify for the administrative exemption and were not entitled to overtime. This victory for Quicken was unexpected. In the wake of the verdict, the company issued a press release explaining that the company "could have settled the lawsuit and avoided an expensive drawn out legal battle, but [Quicken] fought for what is right." 

The plaintiffs' attorneys in the case had argued that the employees did not qualify for the administrative exemption because they were essentially sales workers and not true administrative employees involved in the general management or operations of the company.  The plaintiffs had been encouraged by a 2010 U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) administrator's interpretation directing that the administrative exemption does not apply to mortgage loan officers because, in the view of the DOL, they are primarily engaged in selling rather than administrative functions. This interpretation overturned 2006 opinion letters by the Bush administration finding that loan officers are generally exempt. 

Notably, in response to that 2010 interpretation, Quicken Loans had already modified the manner in which the company compensated loan officers going forward to provide for the payment of overtime.  Also, the facts at issue in the Quicken lawsuit predated the 2010 interpretation.  Still, the Quicken verdict demonstrates that juries will not always agree with the current DOL view that mortgage loan officers are primarily engaged in selling as opposed to performing administrative duties.

Some points for employers to consider:

  • The DOL's view that mortgage loan officers generally are not exempt, of course, remains unchanged.
     
  • The DOL's interpretation is not binding on courts and there may be more verdicts and court decisions finding loan officers exempt – particularly, when the specific facts indicate those employees are not primarily engaged in selling.
     
  • Financial industry employers should continue carefully evaluating whether their lending employees qualify for exemption.
     
  • Most lending institutions are adopting the safer approach and are now paying their mortgage loan officers overtime.
     
  • The Quicken case and the 2010 DOL interpretation concerned employees generally involved in residential lending and not commercial loans. Even the DOL seems to recognize that there may be a better argument that in some circumstances, commercial lenders can qualify for the administrative exemption.
     
  • Perhaps most importantly, employers in all industries must be aware of the concern that the DOL increasingly views any employee in any industry directly involved in the production or selling of a product or service as ineligible for the administrative exemption.
© 2021 Bracewell LLPNational Law Review, Volume I, Number 81
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

About this Author

Leslie Selig Byrd, labor, employment, attorney, Bracewell law firm
Partner

Leslie Selig Byrd has more than 30 years of experience exclusively representing employers in labor and employment issues and controversies.

Leslie represents national and local clients before state and federal agencies. She has been involved in hundreds of administrative investigations, as well as administrative proceedings before the NLRB and the U.S. Department of Labor, Wage & Hour Division, Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs and OSHA. Leslie defends employers in federal and state employment law motion practice and litigation...

210-299-3460
Robert Nichols, employer litigation attorney, bracewell law firm, lawyer harassment claims, wrongful discharge case, occupational safety issues
Partner

Robert Nichols represents employers in litigation, administrative actions and arbitrations concerning discrimination and retaliation, harassment, wrongful discharge, occupational safety and health, union-management relations, wage and hour matters, and other concerns related to employment. Mr. Nichols has defended more than 200 employment-related lawsuits in federal and state court, represented employers in more than 300 federal and state agency employment discrimination investigations, and handled numerous Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) cases,...

713-221-1259
Robert E. Sheeder, Labor Law Attorney, Bracewell Law Firm
Partner

In private practice since 1976, Bob Sheeder represents clients in all aspects of labor and employment law before federal and state agencies and courts. As head of the firm's labor and employment section, his practice includes litigation and counseling in areas of discrimination, harassment, collective actions and class actions, union organizing and wage-hour issues.

214-758-1643
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement