New Member Promotion >>> Save $15 and get a SHRM tote!
Giving applicants with criminal backgrounds a fair chance at employment can be good for business.
Plus all the HR resources you need to be more efficient and effective this fall!
Apply for the SHRM Certification Exam and begin advancing your career.
Learn how to make the business case for diversity, October 25-27.
The minimum wage and overtime pay rules in Colorado’s Minimum Wage Order (MWO) apply to companions for the elderly or infirm who work for third-party employers, a federal judge in Colorado ruled.
Only companions who are employed directly by the households or families of the elderly or infirm are exempt from the rules, the court said. This is the first court decision in Colorado on this issue.
The home health care company in this class action case employed “home health aides” (HHAs) to provide companion services to company clients in the clients’ households. The services included bathing, toileting, making beds, preparing meals, assisting with feeding, preventing falls, and monitoring vital signs.
Colorado’s MWO sets minimum wage and overtime pay rules, but exempts from those rules “companions, casual babysitters, and domestic employees employed by households or family members to perform duties in private residences.”
The company did not pay overtime compensation to its HHAs, but argued the HHAs were exempt from the rules under the companion exemption.
The district court agreed the HHAs were companions, but ruled they were not exempt because they were employed by a third-party – the company – and not by the household or families of clients. The court held that the “household qualifier” in the exemption applied not only to domestic employees, but to companions also.
Federal rules under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) had long exempted from FLSA minimum wage and overtime pay rules companions employed by third parties, but those rules were changed to disallow the exemption. The new rule disallowing the exemption to such companions was recently upheld by a federal appellate court.
Thus, home health care companies in Colorado run a significant financial risk under Colorado and federal law if they do not pay the minimum wage or overtime compensation to companions they employ.
Kennett v. Bayada Home Health Care Inc., D. Colo., No. 14-cv-2005-CMA-MJW (Sept. 24, 2015).
Professional Pointer: Employers should consult with employment counsel to determine whether and how their particular specific organizational needs may be affected by this decision.
Peter F. Munger is an attorney in the Denver office of Jackson Lewis. Republished with permission. ©2015 Jackson Lewis. All rights reserved.
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
CA Resources at Your Fingertips
SHRM’s HR Vendor Directory contains over 3,200 companies