Not a Member? Get access to HR news and resources that you can trust.
HR professionals share their advice for minimizing worker stress and boosting retention.
Is your employee handbook ready for the changing world of work? With SHRM’s Employee Handbook Builder get peace of mind that your handbook is up-to-date.
Virtual SHRM-CP/SHRM-SCP Certification Prep Seminars kick off September 12 and fill up fast!
Expand your influence and learn how to become an effective leader. Join us in Phoenix, AZ | OCTOBER 2 - 4, 2017
Business groups file brief in support of the order blocking the overtime rule
It remains unclear whether President Donald Trump's Department of Labor (DOL) will support the former administration's challenge to a court order blocking the new overtime rule. But there are early indications that new DOL leaders will not fight the court order.
On Jan. 26, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals granted the U.S. Department of Justice's (DOJ's) motion for a 30-day extension in which to file its reply brief in the overtime rule litigation to allow incoming leadership adequate time to consider the issue. The reply brief, which originally was due Feb. 7, will follow on the heels of business groups' friend-of-the-court brief, filed Jan. 24.
The DOL under former President Barack Obama had appealed the Nov. 22, 2016, district court order blocking the overtime rule, but now the DOL might say it consents to the injunction, according to Steven Suflas, an attorney with Ballard Spahr in Denver.
"The new administration—once the department's new leadership is in place—may not want to pursue the appeal further," agreed Robert Boonin, an attorney with Dykema in Detroit.
The motion is consistent with Trump's Chief of Staff Reince Priebus' memo to department heads freezing federal regulations that have not yet taken effect, Suflas added.
The overtime rule was supposed to take effect Dec. 1, 2016. In an e-mail to his clients regarding the status of the overtime rule, Brett Bartlett, an attorney with Seyfarth Shaw in Atlanta, posed the question: If the 5th Circuit reverses the preliminary bar on the overtime regulation and determines that the rule took effect retroactively on Dec. 1, would the rule be considered frozen in that instance or not? While the answer is unclear, "I bring this to your attention because of the commentators who have exclaimed that the overtime rules are dead," he noted. "These rules' demise should not yet be cause for exaggeration."
Business Groups' Brief Supports the Order
The DOJ's motion came a day after business groups, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and National Federation of Independent Business, filed their brief in support of the order blocking the regulation. The business groups, in addition to 21 states, are challenging the overtime rule, and their claims have been consolidated.
The brief maintained that the overtime rule and its higher salary level for determining employees' exempt status "flouts Congress' unambiguous intent to employ functional exemption in which job duties are the primary criterion for applying the exemption" (emphasis in the brief).
The overtime rule is flawed, the brief maintained, for failing to:
[SHRM members-only HR Q&A: Overtime Eligibility: Exempt Salary Basis: What types of compensation can an employer include in an exempt employee's salary to meet the FLSA [Fair Labor Standards Act] minimum salary requirement?]
Low Threshold as Proxy for Exempt Status
The business groups appear to concede that a low threshold is a fair proxy for exempt status, Boonin noted. If an employee's salary is below a low threshold, that employee would almost certainly fail the duties tests, he explained. Under the overtime rule, "the DOL set the floor too high and has acknowledged that it would make millions of workers lose their exempt status even though they meet the duties tests," Boonin said.
The district court order blocking the overtime rule suggested that salary can't be a factor in the exempt analysis. The brief backed away from this stance and said a worker's salary could be so low that the individual couldn't possibly be exempt, Suflas observed.
Doubling the salary level was extreme, and there was little recognition of the impact this would have on the business community, he noted.
But the 21 states suing the Labor Department over the rule made a more direct attack in their brief on the salary threshold "as having been unauthorized and invalid from the very beginning," said John Thompson, an attorney with Fisher Phillips in Atlanta.
Was this article useful? SHRM offers thousands of tools, templates and other exclusive member benefits, including compliance updates, sample policies, HR expert advice, education discounts, a growing online member community and much more. Join/Renew Now and let SHRM help you work smarter.
You have successfully saved this page as a bookmark.
Please confirm that you want to proceed with deleting bookmark.
You have successfully removed bookmark.
Please log in as a SHRM member before saving bookmarks.
Your session has expired. Please log in again before saving bookmarks.
Please purchase a SHRM membership before saving bookmarks.
An error has occurred
Recommended for you
Eye Care: A Visible Contribution to a More Secure Retirement
HR Education in a City Near You
SHRM’s HR Vendor Directory contains over 3,200 companies
[/_catalogs/masterpage/SHRMCore/Main.master][Title][SHRM Online - Society for Human Resource Management]