DOL's Wage and Hour Division Seeks Input on Proposed Worker Classification Survey

By Ilyse Schuman

The Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division (WHD) is seeking public comments on the agency’s proposal to collect information “about employment experiences and workers’ knowledge of basic employment laws and rules so as to better understand employees’ experience with worker misclassification.” According to a notice published in the January 11, 2013 edition of the Federal Register, the proposed Worker Classification Survey is intended to “provide critical information to Department policymakers on whether workers have knowledge of their employment classification and whether they understand the implications of their classification status.” A copy of the proposal can be obtained by contacting Karen Livingston, the WHD’s director of the Division of Strategic Planning and Performance, at (202) 693-0023.

 The WHD notes that this is the first time the agency has attempted to survey workers based on their knowledge of worker misclassification, and that federal law does not currently require employers to notify their workers of their employment status, the basis for their status determinations, or pay. One of the WHD’s long-term goals is to draft a rule that would amend an employer’s recordkeeping requirements under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) to provide employees with greater information about their employment status. According to information on this “Right-to-Know” proposal filed with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the purpose of this rule would be to:

enhance the transparency and disclosure to workers of their status as the employer's employee or some other status, such as an independent contractor, and if an employee, how their pay is computed. The Department also proposes to clarify that the mandatory manual preparation of "homeworker" handbooks applies only to employers of employees performing homework in the restricted industries.

Since this is a long-term rule-making proposition, it is unclear if the agency’s new proposed information collection request related to employee misclassification is a means of testing the necessity of a new rule.

The types of comments the WHD are seeking would address the necessity, burdensomeness, and clarity of the information that would be collected through this proposed worker classification survey. Comments on the proposal must be received on or before March 12, 2013, and contain the agency name and document number 2013-00389 or any other identifier. Comments may be submitted by email to: WHDPRAComments@dol.gov, or by mail or hand-delivery to: Division of Regulations, Legislation, and Interpretation, Wage and Hour, U.S. Department of Labor, Room S-3502, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210.

Photo credit: PressFoto

U.S. Department of Labor Releases Bulletin on Tip Credit Regulations

According to a recently-released Field Assistance Bulletin, the Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division (WHD) has advised its staff to uniformly enforce a rule that became effective on May 5, 2011 governing ownership of employee tips under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). In many states employers are permitted to take a “tip credit,” or pay employees less than the minimum wage so long as the employees receive sufficient tip income to make up the difference. The new WHD tip rule stipulates, among other things, that tips are the property of the employee regardless of whether the employer has taken a tip credit under section 3(m) of the FLSA, and that an employer is prohibited from using an employee’s tips for any reason other than as a tip credit or in furtherance of a legitimate tip pool. The bulletin sent to WHD regional administrators and district directors emphasizes that this rule will be enforced in all states, even the nine states under the jurisdiction of the Ninth Circuit. To learn more about the bulletin and its potential implications for employers, please continue reading at Littler's Washington D.C. Employment Law Update.

Leon Rodriguez to Be Nominated for the Top Job at the Wage and Hour Division

The U.S. Department of Labor informed Congress today that the President intends to nominate Leon Rodriguez as Administrator of the Wage and Hour Division.

The top job at DOL’s Wage & Hour Division has been vacant during the Obama Administration. The President’s first nominee, Lorelei Boylan, withdrew from the confirmation process in October 2009. Ms. Boylan’s confirmation was stalled because of the controversy over the nomination of Solicitor of Labor Patricia Smith (confirmed on February 4, 2010); Ms. Boylan worked for Ms. Smith at the New York Department of Labor.

According to the DOL, Leon Rodriguez currently serves as Deputy Assistant Attorney General and Chief of Staff in the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice, where he oversees the operations of the Division and leads its work on immigration and national origin-related civil rights matters.

Mr. Rodriguez holds a B.A. from Brown University and a J.D. from Boston College Law School. He has spent most of his career working in the public sector, including serving as the County Attorney for Montgomery County, Maryland; an Assistant U.S. Attorney and First Assistant U.S. Attorney in Pittsburgh; and a trial attorney in the Criminal Section of the U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division. Mr. Rodriguez began his legal career in 1988 serving as an Assistant District Attorney in the Kings County District Attorney’s Office in New York.

Thus far, our research has not uncovered any information regarding Mr. Rodriguez’s experience with the Fair Labor Standards Act, the Family and Medical Leave Act, the Davis-Bacon Act, the Service Contract Act or any other laws enforced by the Wage & Hour Division.

This entry was written by Tammy McCutchen.
 

Department of Labor to Provide Information and Documents from Wage-Hour Investigations to Employees and Plaintiffs' Attorneys

Beginning on December 13, 2010, the U.S. Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division will begin assisting employees to find attorneys, and providing employees and their attorneys with information and documents gathered during investigations.

In the past, the Department of Labor (DOL) has fought tenaciously to limit the information and documents it was required to disclose to the public – often through Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) litigation. The DOL often refused requests by employers for information and documents in investigation files. The DOL’s policy was to refuse disclosure of any information or documents until an investigation was closed. Even after an investigation was closed, the DOL would release investigation files only in response to a FOIA request and only as required by the FOIA. The DOL would withhold and refuse to release, for example, any information or documents that could reveal the identity of the complaining employee or any employee providing a witness statement. The DOL would also protect company confidential and proprietary information from disclosure.

These long-standing policies appear to be changing.

On November 23, 2010, the following announcement was posted on the Wage and Hour Division’s website:

The Wage and Hour Division (WHD) and the American Bar Association have announced an unprecedented collaboration providing for an Attorney Referral System. Beginning on December 13, 2010, when FLSA or FMLA complainants are informed that the Wage and Hour Division is declining to pursue their complaints, they may also be given a toll-free number to contact the newly created ABA-Approved Attorney Referral System. In addition, WHD will also provide prompt relevant information and documents on the case to complainants and representing attorneys. Please visit the Attorney Referral System Webpage for more information on this collaboration.

This new program, which the DOL calls the “Bridge to Justice,” raises significant issues for the regulated community regarding information and documents that employers provide to the DOL during wage-hour investigations. Questions that arise include:

  • Will the DOL require employees and their attorneys to file Freedom of Information Act requests before releasing information and documents from its investigation files?
  • What type of documents and information will the DOL be turning over to employees and their attorneys?
  • Will the employees’ attorneys be given the time records and payroll data that employers provided to the DOL during investigations (and which often include employee names, addresses, and Social Security numbers)?
  • Will the DOL provide employers with notice that it is turning over company information or documents?
  • Will employers be provided with the opportunity to object to release of confidential and proprietary company information?

The DOL’s new Attorney Referral System website states only: “The Wage and Hour Division has also developed a special process for complainants and representing attorneys to quickly obtain certain relevant case information and documents when available.”

The website contains no information regarding what this “special,” quick process will be. The DOL has provided no information regarding how it will protect the privacy of employees who may not want information regarding their pay disclosed to coworkers. Nor has the DOL stated whether employers will be given any notice or have an opportunity to object to release of company information and documents to employees or their attorneys. The DOL has not indicated whether it will provide employers with the same information and documents that it provides to employees and their attorneys.

Until the DOL provides the public with answers to some of these questions, employers should carefully consider the types of information and documents provided to the DOL’s Wage and Hour Division during an investigation. At this point, employers have no choice but to assume that any information or document provided to the DOL during an investigation may end up in the hands of plaintiffs’ attorneys.

This entry was written by Tammy McCutchen.*

*Tammy McCutchen is a Shareholder in Littler Mendelson's Washington, D.C. office. Ms. McCutchen served as the Administrator of the U.S. Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division from 2001 to 2004.

UPDATE - New Jersey Considering Whether to Adopt Federal "Rounding" Rules

Seal of New JerseyAs we reported last year, the Division of Wage and Hour Compliance at the New Jersey Department of Labor and Workforce Development rejected federal “rounding” rules for enforcement purposes under New Jersey law. Specifically, while the U.S. Department of Labor assesses the impact of rounding “over a period of time” (and allows rounding practices that “average out” over time), the Division announced that it would evaluate the impact of rounding on a week-to-week basis. According to the Division, if an employer rounds, it must be to the benefit of the employee each week in order to comply with New Jersey law.

It appears that the New Jersey Department of Labor and Workforce Development may be reconsidering its position. The Deputy Commissioner of the Department directed his staff to prepare a notice of proposal for new rules within the New Jersey Administrative Code which would adopt the federal rounding standard. Of course, change takes time. In order to make this change, the Department must undergo full notice and comment rule-making, including the publication of a notice of proposal in the New Jersey Register, the solicitation of comments from the public, and the holding of a public hearing. In the meantime, the Department may still take the enforcement position that rounding practices must be evaluated on a week-to-week basis. We will continue to monitor developments.

This entry was written by Robert Pritchard.
 

Further Analysis on DOL Reversal re: Exempt Status for Mortgage Loan Officers

In a development that may have significant implications for mortgage lenders and other financial services employers, the Department of Labor has issued a new Administrator's Interpretation finding that mortgage loan officers do not qualify as exempt administrative employees under the FLSA, reversing its prior position and withdrawing previous opinion letters concluding to the contrary. To continue reading about this development, see Littler's ASAP Department of Labor Reverses Course: Mortgage Loan Officers Do Not Meet the Administrative Exemption's Requirements by Robert W. Pritchard, R. Brian Dixon and Andrew J. Voss.

U.S. DOL Intends to Revise FLSA Recordkeeping Requirements

The federal Department of Labor (DOL) recently announced its intent to revise the regulations governing the recordkeeping requirements imposed on employers by the Fair Labor Standards Act. Specifically, the DOL’s Wage and Hour Division intends to propose revised regulations that would require employers to disclose how many hours were worked in a pay period, how pay has been computed, what deductions are being made, and whether proper time and one-half overtime pay has been included for overtime hours worked for each pay period.

In addition, the proposed regulations would “modernize” certain recordkeeping requirements by allowing for “automated and electronic recordkeeping systems and methods to take the place of mandatory paper records that are currently required in some instances for employees” who work from home.

The DOL anticipates issuing a notice of proposed rulemaking in August of 2010.

This entry was written by Christopher Kaczmarek.

 

Employers Beware: DOL Investigation and Enforcement Increasing by 33 Percent

Employers beware! This is the message emanating loud and clear from the Obama Administration's Department of Labor. Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis recently announced that the Department is dramatically increasing its enforcement of federal employment laws with an additional 250 new wage and hour investigators. This influx of new investigators boosts the departmental investigative staff by a full one third.

With this announcement, Secretary Solis promised, "America's workers should rest assured that protecting worker rights is a top priority at the Department of Labor." Her press release warned, "[t]here is no excuse for employers who disregard federal labor standards--especially those that are designed to protect the most vulnerable in the workplace."

Broad Investigative Powers

The Department's Wage and Hour Division investigates allegations that employers failed to pay minimum wage or overtime, as well as alleged misclassification of employees as exempt or independent contractors.1 DOL investigations can be triggered by complaints from employees, unions, or competitors, and routine audits also can be performed, often focusing on a particular industry or type of employer.

The Department has broad investigative powers, including the power to subpoena employment records. Assuming wage and hour violations are discovered, the Department will seek a settlement. If an out-of-court agreement is not reached, the Department can sue to enjoin an employer's violation of the law as well as to compel the payment of back pay to all employees. The Department also has the power to seek reinstatement with back pay of any individual employee who was discharged for attempting to enforce the law.

Should the Department bring suit and prevail, it will recover liquidated damages equal to the unpaid wages the employer owes, unless the employer can prove that it acted in good faith with a reasonable belief that its pay practices complied with the law. Interest and attorney's fees are likely to be awarded as well, even if liquidated damages are not.

Significant Settlements

The threat of such enforcement actions can result in employers agreeing to settlements that provide significant recoveries. For instance, in July 2009, the Department announced a settlement of almost $750,000 with a convenience store chain in nine states accused of failing to properly include performance-related bonuses in the regular rate used to calculate overtime pay.

The Department also is planning a "public awareness campaign" to inform workers of their "rights," which presumably also will assist the Department in finding errant employers to investigate and prosecute.

Wake-Up Call

The federal government's increased manpower and desire to enforce federal labor standards should be a wake up call to United States employers to ensure that their procedures and practices comply with federal labor laws.

Audits conducted by or through counsel can catch technical problems with pay practices, recordkeeping, and employee classification that can be corrected to reduce exposure. Training of managers in employment laws such as when overtime is required can avoid violations caused by managers' ignorance of legal obligations.

These proactive steps can save employers the expense and embarrassment of reacting to a government investigation or a costly class action.

This entry was written by Alison Hightower.


1 The Wage and Hour Division also governs the hours and conditions for employment of children under 16 years old and it enforces the labor standards provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) that apply to aliens authorized to work in the U.S. under certain nonimmigrant visa programs.

Obama Nominates Lorelei Boylan to Lead the DOL's Wage and Hour Division

President Obama has chosen Lorelei Boylan as his nominee for Administrator of the Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division.  Continue reading on Littler's Washington DC Employment Law Update blog.

Part III: Creating a Plan with Your MODO

This final segment of our three part series on the Multi State District Office (MODO) focuses on creating informal agreements with your MODO with regards to voluntary compliance.

Of course, most District Offices, in addition to MODO responsibilities, must also conduct and manage its own investigation case load, and tend to have more work than resources. So, if a company has not had multiple investigations, a large investigation covering multiple facilities or a history of non-compliance, the employer will have little (or no) contact with its MODO.

However, MODOs are also tasked with encouraging employers to create voluntary compliance programs and to work with cooperatively with employers who choose to create such programs. Thus, MODOs will welcome an employer interested in developing a cooperative program to maintain compliance.

There are no written or formal agreements between MODOs and employers – and, in most cases, we would not recommend entering a formal agreement. However, it is very beneficial for companies to create informal arrangements with their MODOs. The arrangement usually begins with a meet and greet between the District Director of the MODO and senior company executives (such as the General Counsel and/or Vice President of Human Resources). During this meeting the employer demonstrates their commitment to compliance and designates a contact person who will deal directly with the DOL. In return, the company should ask the MODO to notify the contact person whenever a complaint is filed against the company.

Both the DOL and employers benefit from this relationship. First, the employer’s contact person is able to develop a relationship with the MODO. If a complaint is filed, there is less tension on both sides and the matter is usually resolved quickly and efficiently. Rather than an investigator asking a manager for payroll records, the MODO will call the contact person and obtain the records and set up interviews if necessary. This process helps the employer avoid unreasonable investigators, and if a bad investigator is assigned to investigate the company, the employer can seek relief from the MODO. The process is less disruptive and easier on both parities. Another advantage of working with a MODO is the ability to obtain their assistance when conducting self audits or correcting payroll errors. Finally, the DOL usually will not assess civil money penalties or interest to employers who develop positive working relationships with them.

With increased wage and hour enforcement on the horizon, it is more important then ever to develop a good working relationship with your company’s MODO. Creating a partnership with your MODO now is perhaps the best preventative measure you can take to avoid contentious and unpleasant investigations in the future.

This blog entry was authored by Salvador Simao.

Part II: Multi-State Enterprises and MODOs

This second part of our three part series on the Main Office District Office (MODO) focuses on the specific procedures that apply to multi-state enterprises.  A previously reported in Part I:  Who's Your MODO, Littler's Salvador Simao, a former trial attorney with the Department of Labor (DOL), discusses ways in which multi-state employers can effectively partner with the DOL.

Although not generally known by employers, the Wage and Hour Division has procedures to coordinate enforcement efforts for multi-state employers. These procedures are outlined within Chapter 61 of the Wage Hour Field Operations Handbook (FOH), which is not released to the public. The purpose of these procedures is two fold: First, to ensure consistent results when investigating similar issues in different facilities in different geographic locations. Second, to enable the Wage and Hour Division to uncover national, systematic violations.

In general, these procedures assigns each multi-state employer to the District Office (DO) with geographic jurisdiction over the employer’s company headquarters (or Main Office – MO). Thus, the acronym for the multi-state employer process is the MODO process – the Main Office District Office. The goal of the MODO process is to obtain maximum compliance while using DOL resources as efficiently as possible.

Of course, investigators have primary responsibility for conducting a wage-hour investigation in a single facility. Under the MODO process, however, an investigator can recommend that the investigation be expanded to cover additional facilities or even all the facilities of the employer if s/he uncovers a violation that appears to be caused by a company-wide policy or process. The decision to expand the investigation beyond one facility or one state is made by the MODO, who will consider the employer’s overall enforcement history in making that decision.

It is also the MODO’s responsibility to independently monitor the multi-state employers headquartered within its jurisdiction. The MODO will look for similar violations occurring at an employer’s facilities in different states to determine whether a national investigation is warranted. The MODO will create a strategy to ensure the employer comes into and remains in compliance with wage-hour laws. To this end, the MODO will receive reports at the conclusion of every investigation involving the multi-state employers headquartered within its jurisdiction.
These responsibilities of the MODO are generally accomplished using the Wage and Hour Division’s enforcement database, called WHISARD, which contains information regarding every investigation conducted by the Division.

The final segment of our three part series on the Multi State District Office (MODO) will focus on creating informal agreements with your MODO with regards to voluntary compliance.

This blog entry was authored by Salvador Simao.

Part I: Who's Your MODO? Partnering With the U.S. Department of Labor

In this three-part series, Littler shareholder Salvador Simao, a former trial attorney with the Department of Labor (DOL), discusses ways in which multi-state employers can effectively partner with the DOL. The first part examines the organization of the DOL Wage & Hour Division, and enforcement efforts under new Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis.

In her first public appearance after Senate confirmation, Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis declared to the AFL-CIO Executive Council, “There is a new sheriff in town.” Armed with reports from the Congressional General Accounting Office (GAO) criticizing enforcement efforts by the Wage and Hour Division, Secretary Solis is well positioned to begin changing the culture at DOL.
Already, the Wage and Hour Division is hiring 100 new investigators. Congress gave DOL funding for the new investigators in the stimulus package. Under the Bush administration, although collecting more back wages than the Clinton administration, the number of wage-hour investigators declined from 950 to 750. In short, we can expect to see increased wage-hour enforcement in the near future.

What can employers do to minimize or avoid aggressive enforcement? One way is to seek a cooperative relationship with your company’s Wage and Hour Division MODO. What is a MODO? Read on – we explain it all below.

Organization of the Wage and Hour Division
The DOL’s Wage and Hour Division enforces the Fair Labor Standards Act, Family Medical Leave Act, the Employee Polygraph Protection Act, the Consumer Credit Protection Act, and prevailing wage laws. Generally, the Wage and Hour Division will conduct an investigation of a company if it receives an employee complaint or as part of a targeted initiative (e.g., a survey of child labor compliance in quick service restaurants). At times, follow-up investigations will be done to ensure continued compliance with the laws.

Investigations are performed out of about 50 district offices. Each district office has a District Director (DD), one or two Assistant District Directors (ADD) and, of course, investigators. Some districts are so large that they have satellite offices. For example, in North Carolina the district office is Raleigh, but there is also a “field office” in Charlotte. Field Offices are normally run by an ADD who reports to the DD in the district office.

District Directors report into a regional office, which in turn reports into the national office. The Wage and Hour Division has five regional offices: the Northeast Region in Philadelphia, the Southeast Region in Atlanta, the Southwest Region in Dallas, the Midwest Region in Chicago and the West Region in San Francisco. Each regional office is run by a Regional Administrator and a Deputy Regional Administrator. Employers rarely deal with the regional and national offices, as most investigations are resolved at the district office level.

As is true in any organization, individual investigators have different styles and approaches when it comes to conducting audits. However, there are ways to reduce anxiety and ensure consistency in various audits if your company has locations in multiple states. In the second part of this series, we explain the role of the Main Office District Office (MODO) and the specific procedures that apply to multi-state enterprises.

This blog entry was autored by Salvador Simao.