Following two years of anticipation, after a similar but more aggressive rule was proposed by President Obama’s administration and then squashed by federal courts in Texas, the Department of Labor (DOL) has issued the long-awaited Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that, if enacted, would expand access to overtime pay for certain employees under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).  DOL estimates that this change could expand overtime eligibility for over one million American workers, about 3.7 million fewer than would have been impacted under the Obama proposal.  The proposed rule is available here.

Impact of Obama-Era Proposal

Under the rule currently in effect, certain white-collar workers are exempt from the FLSA’s overtime pay requirements if they are paid a salary of at least $455 per week (annualized to $23,660) and perform certain specified duties.  This minimum salary threshold was last increased in 2004.  The Obama-era rule would have more than doubled the minimum salary to $970 per week (annualized to $47,476), with a mechanism for automatic adjustments every three years to keep up with inflation.

While DOL estimated that the Obama proposal would expand overtime protections to nearly 4.2 million then-exempt employees, critics argued that the higher salary threshold would increase business costs, drive up the use of part-time entry-level workers and independent contractors, and ultimately reduce opportunities for employees reclassified as non-exempt.  A group of 21 states and over 50 business groups filed a lawsuit in federal district court seeking to enjoin the rule.  The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas issued a preliminary nationwide injunction just one week before the rule was set to take effect in November 2016.  In August 2017, the district court invalidated the rule, holding that DOL exceeded its statutory authority by increasing the salary threshold to a level that had the effect of eviscerating the duties test.

Under the new Trump Administration, DOL adopted a different approach to defending the lawsuit.  DOL now agreed with the plaintiffs that the Obama-era increase was too high, but it nevertheless continued to defend the agency’s authority to set the minimum salary threshold.  In October 2017, DOL appealed the district court’s decision to the Fifth Circuit, but asked the appeals court to hold the appeal in abeyance while DOL undertook further rulemaking to determine the appropriate salary level.  The new proposed rule announced March 7, 2019, is the culmination of that process.

The New Proposal

The new proposed rule would increase the minimum salary threshold to $679 per week, or $35,308 annually.  It also would permit employers to count nondiscretionary bonuses and incentive payments (including commissions) to satisfy up to 10 percent of the standard salary threshold, provided that such bonuses are paid annually or more frequently.  A nearly identical provision was included in the Obama-era rule.  Although some employers may find the new proposal’s $35,308 salary threshold more palatable than the higher threshold in the Obama-era proposal, the new rule may face criticism because, like the Obama rule, it fails to account for industry-specific or regional differences in market salaries.

The new proposed rule would also change the Highly Compensated Employee (HCE) test.  The HCE test allows employers to apply overtime exemptions to employees under a reduced duties requirement if the employee meets a higher compensation threshold.  The proposed rule would increase the HCE compensation level to $147,414 from $100,000, equivalent to the 90th percentile of full-time salaried workers nationally.  The Obama proposal included a more modest increase to $134,004.

As with the Obama rule, the new proposed rule does not change the “duties test,” meaning that there will be no change to which workers qualify as “white collar” based on the job duties they perform.

One unique feature of the new proposed rule is a requirement that salary levels be updated every four years through the regular notice-and-comment rulemaking process.  This contrasts with the automatic updates in the Obama-era proposal, which drew criticism for being too rigid in not allowing more discretion from DOL or input from the public.

What’s Next

The new proposed rule does not take effect immediately.  The public will have 60 days to comment from the date the proposed rule is published in the Federal Register.  A final rule will be published after the comment period has ended.

Employers should keep in mind that some states, such as California, continue to have stricter requirements and salary thresholds for overtime exemption than under the federal FLSA.

Photo of Lindsay Burke Lindsay Burke

Lindsay Burke co-chairs the firm’s employment practice group and regularly advises U.S., international, and multinational employers on employee management issues and international HR compliance. Her practice includes advice pertaining to harassment, discrimination, leave, whistleblower, wage and hour, trade secret, and reduction-in-force issues arising…

Lindsay Burke co-chairs the firm’s employment practice group and regularly advises U.S., international, and multinational employers on employee management issues and international HR compliance. Her practice includes advice pertaining to harassment, discrimination, leave, whistleblower, wage and hour, trade secret, and reduction-in-force issues arising under federal and state laws, and she frequently partners with white collar colleagues to conduct internal investigations of executive misconduct and workplace culture assessments in the wake of the #MeToo movement. Recently, Lindsay has provided critical advice and guidance to employers grappling with COVID-19-related employment issues.

Lindsay guides employers through the process of hiring and terminating employees and managing their performance, including the drafting and review of employment agreements, restrictive covenant agreements, separation agreements, performance plans, and key employee policies and handbooks. She provides practical advice against the backdrop of the web of state and federal employment laws, such as Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Family and Medical Leave Act, the Fair Labor Standards Act, and the False Claims Act, with the objective of minimizing the risk of employee litigation. When litigation looms, Lindsay relies on her experience as an employment litigator to offer employers strategic advice and assistance in responding to demand letters and agency charges.

Lindsay works frequently with the firm’s privacy, employee benefits and executive compensation, corporate, government contracts, and cybersecurity practice groups to ensure that all potential employment issues are addressed in matters handled by these groups. She also regularly provides U.S. employment law training, support, and assistance to start-ups, non-profits, and foreign parent companies opening affiliates in the U.S.

Photo of Carolyn Rashby Carolyn Rashby

Carolyn Rashby provides business-focused advice and counsel to companies navigating the constantly evolving and overlapping maze of federal, state, and local employment requirements. She conducts workplace investigations and cultural assessments, leads audits regarding employee classification, wage and hour, and I-9 compliance, advises on…

Carolyn Rashby provides business-focused advice and counsel to companies navigating the constantly evolving and overlapping maze of federal, state, and local employment requirements. She conducts workplace investigations and cultural assessments, leads audits regarding employee classification, wage and hour, and I-9 compliance, advises on employment issues arising in corporate transactions, and provides strategic counsel to clients on a wide range of workplace matters, including harassment and #MeToo issues, wage and hour, worker classification, employee accommodations, termination decisions, employment agreements, trade secrets, restrictive covenants, employee handbooks, and personnel policies. Her approach is preventive, while recognizing the need to set clients up for the best possible defense should disputes arise.

Photo of Tom Plotkin Tom Plotkin

Tom Plotkin advises clients on a range of domestic and international labor and employment issues. His domestic practice focuses on hiring and firing, discrimination, harassment, whistleblower, wage and hour, trade secrets, non-competition, and other issues arising under federal and state employment laws. His…

Tom Plotkin advises clients on a range of domestic and international labor and employment issues. His domestic practice focuses on hiring and firing, discrimination, harassment, whistleblower, wage and hour, trade secrets, non-competition, and other issues arising under federal and state employment laws. His international practice involves assisting companies in developing strategies and policies for managing cross-border workforces.

Mr. Plotkin also focuses on a number of cutting edge issues at the intersection of employment law and workforce management. As part of Covington’s Business and Human Rights Initiative, Mr. Plotkin assists companies in complying with global laws aimed at monitoring forced and trafficked labor in international supply chains. He also frequently partners with white collar colleagues to conduct internal workplace culture assessments and audits in the wake of the #MeToo movement.