July 2, 2020

Volume X, Number 184

July 01, 2020

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

June 30, 2020

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

June 29, 2020

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

WHD Releases Text of Proposed Revisions to the Fluctuating Workweek Regulations

On August 26, 2019, we wrote of the plan by the U.S. Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division (“WHD”) to update the Fair Labor Standard Act (“FLSA”) regulations on calculating overtime pay for salaried non-exempt workers to allow employers to include additional forms of compensation in the so-called “fluctuating workweek” calculations.  Under a fluctuating workweek calculation, an employer divides all of an employee’s relevant compensation for a given workweek by the total number of hours the employee worked in the week to derive the regular rate for that week, and then pays one half of that regular rate—in addition to the other pay the employee is receiving for the week—for each hour of overtime.  This method of calculating overtime is available under federal law and in most, but not all, states.  On November 4, 2019, the WHD released the text of the proposed rule for public comment.

The WHD proposes to revise the applicable regulations at 29 C.F.R. part 778 to state expressly that any additional forms of compensation—whether bonuses, premium payments, or otherwise, and whether time- or performance-based—are compatible with the fluctuating workweek method of compensation, and that such payments must factor into the calculation of the regular rate unless they fall within a regular rate exclusion under FLSA sections 7(e)(1)-(8) (e.g., gifts, special occasion bonuses, discretionary bonuses, premium pay for hours in excess of a daily/weekly standard or for work on weekends/holidays/outside the basic workweeks, and payments not for hours worked).  In an attempt to provide even greater clarity, the WHD’s proposal includes three illustrative examples, lists each of the requirements for using the fluctuating workweek method, and changes the title of the regulation from “Fixed salary for fluctuating hours” to “Fluctuating Workweek Method of Computing Overtime.”  As the WHD acknowledges, this proposal represents a departure from the WHD’s 2011 announcement that bonuses and premium pay are incompatible with the fluctuating workweek method of computing overtime, and newfound recognition that bonuses and premium payments are not only common, but also potentially beneficial for employees.

If adopted, the WHD’s proposed rule may result in more employers using the fluctuating workweek method of compensation, as it eliminates confusion about the availability of bonus pay, and likewise, it may prompt more employers to provide bonuses to salaried non-exempt employees.

Employers are encouraged to review the proposal in full and submit any comments by the December 5, 2019 comment deadline.

©2020 Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. All rights reserved.National Law Review, Volume IX, Number 311


About this Author

Jeffrey H. Ruzal, epstein becker green, new york, fair labor, employment

JEFFREY H. RUZAL is a Member in the Labor and Employment practice, in the New York office of Epstein Becker Green.

Mr. Ruzal's experience includes:

  • Representing employers in employment-related litigation in federal courts and before administrative agencies

  • Representing employers in the defense of putative collective actions under the Fair Labor Standards Act and class actions under the New York State Wage and Hour Law

  • ...

Carly Baratt, Epstein Becker Law Firm, New York, Health Care, Labor and Employment Litigation Attorney

Carly Baratt is an Associate in the Employment, Labor & Workforce Management and Litigation & Business Disputes practices, in the New York office of Epstein Becker Green.

Ms. Baratt:

  • Represents clients in employment-related litigation on a broad array of matters, including claims of discrimination, harassment, retaliation, wrongful termination, and breach of employment contract

  • Counsels clients in the health care and financial industries through a range of investigations and enforcement proceedings brought by federal and state agencies, including the U.S. Department of Justice, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Financial Conduct Authority, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, the Office of the Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program, the New York State Department of Financial Services, the New York State Office of the Attorney General, the U.S. Department of Labor, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Inspector General, and the Federal Transit Administration

  • Represents clients in actions involving residential mortgage-backed securities; securities, accounting, bank, or health care fraud; and violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act

  • Defends clients in False Claims Act and Anti-Kickback Statute cases (including qui tam litigation)