Yesterday, the Supreme Court of the United States granted a writ of certiorari in Christopher v. SmithKline Beecham Corp.  The Ninth Circuit’s opinion, now on appeal, can be viewed here.  The issue was whether pharmaceutical sales representatives are “outside salesman” as referenced in Section 213(a) of the Fair Labor Standards Act and therefore exempt from legal overtime requirements.  The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals determined that the salespeople were exempt from overtime, thus refusing to defer to the Department of Labor’s regulations on this issue.

The Supreme Court has granted review on these issues:

“(1) Whether deference is owed to the Secretary of Labor’s interpretation of the Fair Labor Standards Act’s outside sales exemption and related regulations; and (2) whether the Fair Labor Standards Act’s outside sales exemption applies to pharmaceutical sales representatives.”

The petition for certiorari may be viewed here.

Categories: Judicial Decisions Tags: Appeals, Case Commentary, Department of Labor, FLSA, Labor and Employment, Ninth Circuit, Overtime, Sales Representatives, US Supreme Court, Wage and Hour

In Simmons v. United Mortgage and Loan Investment, LLC, the Fourth Circuit ruled for plaintiffs and reversed the district court in this wage and hour case.  The plaintiffs are Charlotte-based Junior Asset Managers for a mortgage company who were not paid overtime even though they worked more than 40 hours per week.  They brought claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and North Carolina Wage and Hour Act (NCWHA) based on the failure to pay overtime.  The primary issue is whether the plaintiffs will be able to pursue their case as a collective and class action on behalf the other underpaid workers at the company.  The defendants tried to short-circuit the collective/class action process by tendering a limited settlement offer before other workers could be notified of the case.  The Fourth Circuit rejected this tactic, finding the settlement too indefinite to moot the case.  The Court remanded the case to the trial court to consider plaintiff’s motion to certify the collective action and plaintiffs’ amendments to the NCWHA claims.  Ann Groninger, Burton Craige, and Narendra Ghosh are representing the plaintiffs.

More from the opinion below:

Read more…

Categories: Judicial Decisions, News of the Firm Tags: Ann Groninger, Appeals, Burton Craige, Charlotte, Class Action, Collective Action, Fair Labor Standards Act, FLSA, Fourth Circuit, Labor and Employment, Narendra Ghosh, NCWHA, North Carolina Wage and Hour Act, Overtime, Results, Wage and Hour, Wages

In Simmons v. United Mortgage and Loan Investment, LLC, we have filed this reply brief with the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in this wage and hour case.  See here for a summary of the case.   Ann Groninger, Burton Craige, and Narendra Ghosh are representing the plaintiffs, who are seeking to remedy the company’s failure to pay overtime to themselves and other Junior Asset Managers.  Here is a summary of our argument to the Court:

Read more…

Categories: News of the Firm Tags: Ann Groninger, Appeals, Briefs, Burton Craige, Class Action, Collective Action, FLSA, Fourth Circuit, Labor and Employment, Narendra Ghosh, NC Wage and Hour Act, Overtime, Wage and Hour

In Simmons v. United Mortgage and Loan Investment, LLC, we have filed this opening brief with the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in this wage and hour case.  The plaintiffs are Charlotte-based Junior Asset Managers for a mortgage company who were not paid overtime even though they worked more than 40 hours per week.  They brought claims under the FLSA and NC Wage and Hour law based on the failure to pay overtime.  The primary issue is whether the plaintiffs will be able to pursue their case as a collective and class action on behalf the other underpaid workers at the company.  The defendants have tried to short-circuit the collective/class action process by tendering a limited settlement offer before other workers could be notified of the case.  Ann Groninger, Burton Craige, and Narendra Ghosh are representing the plaintiffs. Read more…

Categories: News of the Firm Tags: Ann Groninger, Appeals, Burton Craige, Class Action, Collective Action, FLSA, Fourth Circuit, Labor and Employment, Narendra Ghosh, North Carolina Wage and Hour Act, Overtime, Wage and Hour

A new study, “Broken Laws, Unprotected Workers,” shows that employers routinely violate the employment rights  of low wage workers, with frequent violations of the wage and hour laws, workers’ compensation laws, and anti-retaliation protections.  (The original study is here; a summary of the study is here.)  Here are some of the startling findings:

• 68 percent of the workers interviewed had experienced at least one pay-related violation in the previous work week, including failures to pay earned wages, at least minimum wage, or overtime pay.
• 26 percent of the workers had been paid less than the minimum wage the week before being surveyed and that one in seven had worked off the clock the previous week.
• 76 percent of those who had worked overtime the week before were not paid their proper overtime. Read more…

Categories: General News Tags: Labor and Employment, Minimum Wage, Overtime, Retaliation, Union, Wage and Hour, Workers' Compensation

In Desmond v. PNGI Charles Town Gaming, the Fourth Circuit reversed the trial court, concluding instead that the plaintiff was not exempt from being paid overtime as an administrative employee.  Under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), one of the “white collar” exceptions to the overtime requirement is the administrative exception.  An administrative position is “office or non-manual work directly related to the management or general business operations of the employer or the employer’s customers” that involves a significant amount of independant discretion.

In this case, the plaintiff was a racing official for a casino and live horse racing facility.  The trial court had found the plaintiff to be an administrative employee because his position was indispensable to the business.  The Fourth Circuit found otherwise, as the plaintiff’s position did not involve the company’s general business operations, but rather was similar to positions on a manufacturing production line or selling a product in a retail or service establishment.  Therefore, he was entitled to overtime.

Categories: Judicial Decisions Tags: Case Commentary, FLSA, Fourth Circuit, Labor and Employment, Overtime, Wage and Hour, White Collar Exceptions