Get access to the exclusive HR Resources you need to succeed in 2018!
SHRM board member David Windley discusses how unconscious bias can derail workplace diversity efforts.
Is your employee handbook keeping up with the changing world of work? With SHRM's Employee Handbook Builder get peace of mind that your handbook is up-to-date.
Build competencies, establish credibility and advance your career—while earning PDCs—at SHRM Seminars in 12 cities across the U.S. this spring.
#SHRM18 will expand your perspective – on your organization, on your career, and on the way you approach HR. Join us in Chicago June 17-20, 2018
Members may download one copy of our sample forms and templates for your personal use within your organization. Please note that all such forms and policies should be reviewed by your legal counsel for compliance with applicable law, and should be modified to suit your organization’s culture, industry, and practices. Neither members nor non-members may reproduce such samples in any other way (e.g., to republish in a book or use for a commercial purpose) without SHRM’s permission. To request permission for specific items, click on the “reuse permissions” button on the page where you find the item.
The proposed increase to the salary threshold for exempt employees is too high and will have a significant negative impact on employers and employees, the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) wrote in comments to the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL).
The salary level—which would more than double from the current $455 per week to a proposed $970 per week in 2016—will create difficulties particularly for nonprofit organizations, state and local governments, and organizations based in certain regions of the country with lower costs of living and lower incomes, SHRM said.
The DOL has set the new salary threshold at the 40th percentile of earnings for full-time salaried employees, a significant change from the past. The regulatory history reflects Democratic and Republican administrations adjusting the salary level between 10 and 20 percent while taking into consideration industry and regional differences, wrote Mike Aitken, SHRM vice president, government affairs.
Many CEOs at small nonprofits earn salaries below the proposed salary threshold, Aitken stated, creating the absurd possibility of nonexempt executives.
He noted that the Nonprofit Times reported the average salary for CEOs of small nonprofits to be $59,510. Under the proposed salary level, exempt employees would earn at least $50,440 a year in 2016, an amount that would automatically increase each year. SHRM opposes the automatic increase.
“Many small nonprofit CEOs in the sample likely earned salaries below the proposed salary threshold,” SHRM wrote.
Additionally, a 2014 survey of compensation at nonprofits conducted by the American Society of Association Executives found annual compensation of some CEOs at nonprofits to be as low as $37,500—well below $50,440.
Other average salaries for executives at small nonprofits in 2013 were, according to the Nonprofit Times:
The proposed rule also failed to sufficiently take into account the differences in wages depending on different costs of living by region, SHRM stated.
CNN Money’s Cost of Living Calculator estimates that:
“Yet DOL’s proposal contains no meaningful analysis to determine the impact on jobs in regions with low costs of living,” Aitken wrote. “The department’s proposed salary threshold is one-size-fits-all; there are no regional variations.”
He added, “That would not necessarily be a problem if the department appropriately considered regional variations in selecting the salary threshold, but it did not.”
Will employees benefit from the higher salary threshold? Of the 4.6 million employees directly affected by the salary level, only 988,000 work more than 40 hours in a week. That means 3.7 million of the affected employees do not regularly work more than 40 hours in a week.
The result? The majority of affected employees “are likely to experience negative consequences of reclassification, including reduced workplace flexibility, loss of professional status and reduced access to opportunity to gain needed experience,” SHRM said.
“While DOL’s proposal acknowledges that the proposed rule may have some adverse effect on employees, the consequences of reclassification are not considered in any depth,” Aitken wrote in SHRM’s comments. “Of course the department could mitigate the impact of these negative consequences by more appropriately setting the salary threshold so that it serves as a reasonable proxy for those employees unlikely to pass the duties test.”
SHRM noted that it supports DOL’s position to refrain from making any changes to the existing duties test, but expressed concern that the department is considering further restricting the executive exemption. “If overtime regulations are modified to eliminate the ability of employees to perform concurrent duties and maintain their exempt status, many organizations would need to be restricted in ways that diminish the services being provided,” SHRM said.
Allen Smith, J.D., is the manager of workplace law content for SHRM. Follow him @SHRMlegaleditor.
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.
Please sign in as a SHRM member before saving bookmarks.
Please purchase a SHRM membership before saving bookmarks.
An error has occurred
Recommended for you
Join SHRM's exclusive peer-to-peer social network
SHRM’s HR Vendor Directory contains over 3,200 companies