The Employer E-Letter: Labor and Employment Law News
from the Duluth, Minnesota law firm of
Hanft Fride, A Professional Association.
Co-Editors, Scott A. Witty, saw@hanftlaw.com and Richard R. Burns, rrb@hanftlaw.com.
Please feel free to forward this e-mail or share it with others. If there are other topics of interest to you or any other suggestions concerning this newsletter, please let us know.
THIS MONTH’S TOPICS:
- TEXAS JUDGE RETURNS MINIMUM SALARY THRESHOLDS FOR OVERTIME EXEMPTIONS TO PRE-JULY 1, 2024 RATES
- NLRB: EMPLOYERS CAN NO LONGER HOLD CAPTIVE AUDIENCE MEETINGS
- UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS PROPERLY DEMINED FOR EMPLOYEE URINATING IN PUBLIC (TWICE)
- SECOND VISION TEST PROBLEMATIC FOR EMPLOYERS
- TIP OF THE MONTH
TEXAS JUDGE RETURNS MINIMUM SALARY THRESHOLDS FOR OVERTIME EXEMPTIONS TO PRE-JULY 1, 2024 RATES
On November 15, a Federal District Court Judge in Texas invalidated the DOL’s new overtime rule, which had raised the salary threshold for employees who are exempt from overtime pay under the FSLA’s executive, administrative and professional employees exemption. The new rule had already imposed a salary increase on July 1st of this year, and the next increase was set to go into effect on Jan 1, 2025. This is no longer the case after the U.S District Court for the Eastern District of Texas’ decision in Plano Chamber of Commerce v. United States Department of Labor,which granted a nation-wide injunction precluding application of the Rule based on the Judge’s conclusion that the Department overstepped its authority in setting and raising minimum salary thresholds in that matter. As a consequence, the salary threshold for exemption reverts to what it was before July 1, 2024. Now employers with executive, administrative and professional employees whose salaries are more than $684 per week or $35,568 annually, and who meet the “duties” test for exemption, are once again exempt from the FLSA’s overtime pay requirements. Though, the DOL could appeal the Eastern District of Texas’s ruling, it seems somewhat unlikely with the incoming administration.
NLRB: EMPLOYERS CAN NO LONGER HOLD CAPTIVE AUDIENCE MEETINGS
In a recent watershed decision, Amazon.com Services LLC, the National Labor Relations Board overruled a 1948 case, Babcock & Wilcox, and held that “captive audience meetings” violate the NLRA’s Section 8(a)(1) and interfere with employees’ ability to exercise their Section 7 rights, which include the right to be fully informed about unions, the right to have open and free discussions and the right to freely organize. Under Babcock & Wilcox and its progeny, employers could compel employees, by coercive means or “under the threat of discipline or discharge,” to attend meetings during which employees would be required to listen to an employer’s views on unions. The line of Babcock & Wilcox decisions gave employers free reign to hold these “captive audience meetings” for as long as they wanted as many times as they wanted, and to silence, or even banish, employees who asked questions or expressed their own views during such meetings. To be clear, while this latest NLRB decision not only overrules Babcock and holds that captive audience meetings are now a violation of federal law, it does not prohibit employers from expressing their thoughts and views on unions during a meeting, so long as meeting attendance is truly voluntary and allows for unrestricted discourse between employers and employees.
Employers do not need to introduce an explicit prohibition against certain types of behaviors, such as public urination, in their Employee Handbooks or professional workplace policies in order to terminate an employee for violation said policy or misconduct. In Vaudrin v. Tri-Vally Opportunity Council and Dep’t of Emp’t and Econ. Dev., A24-0455, 2024 WL 4481611 (Minn.App. Oct. 14, 2024), an employee was caught urinating in public on two occasions while at work and was subsequently fired for violating the company’s professional conduct policy. The Minnesota Court of Appeal affirmed an Unemployment Law Judge’s decision to deny the employee’s request for unemployment benefits, finding that public urination can constitute employee misconduct. Employers should know that though they do not need to provide employees with an explicit list of all prohibited workplace behaviors in order to successfully defend unemployment claims. Employers should still ensure that behavior expectations of their employees are reasonable and known by all employees.
The United States District Court for the District of Minnesota recently denied the Union Pacific Railroad Company’s (“Union Pacific”) motion to dismiss various claims asserted on behalf of twenty-one employees who were fired after failing a visual acuity test. Despite passing an initial and acceptable vision test, Union Pacific required the employees to complete a second visual test and/or provide additional medical information pertaining to visual disabilities in violation of the ADA. In denying Union Pacific’s motion, the court held the EEOC had plausibly alleged the plaintiffs: (1) were considered disabled within the ADA’s disability definition; (2) were qualified individuals under the ADA; and (3) had suffered adverse employment. Additionally, the Court found the EEOC’s argument that the statute of limitations was paused was persuasive because the statute of limitations tolls (pauses) for all intervenors and class members of a class action while a class is certified until certification is reversed.
TIP OF THE MONTH
As the winter weather season has arrived, it is good to be reminded of the Fair Labor Standard Act rules that apply during the work week.
Hourly employees, of course, do not need to be paid when they do not show up for work because of inclement weather or even when the employer closes the business early during inclement weather, such as a snowstorm. Exempt salaried employees, however, cannot be docked pay for partial days missed or full days missed when you close your business. The Fair Labor Standard Act (FLSA) rules make it clear that, if you provide personal days or vacation, you, in fact, may require a salaried employee to apply vacation or other paid time off. For example, if you close your office after two hours on one day and remain closed the next day, you could require a salaried employee to deduct 14 hours of vacation or paid time off. To the extent a salaried employee has used all of their vacation or paid time off, you need to pay them without any deduction. On the other hand, if he/she simply does not show up, because he/she feels, for example, ” snowed in” , this could be considered an absence for personal reasons, and you can deduct a full day of pay. However, if a salaried employee simply decides to leave early to make sure that they get home safely, your only alternative is to use paid time off or vacation, as you cannot dock for partial days without risking loss of exempt status.
Obviously, there are safety reasons to be considered so you would not want employees to report in many instances, and good employee relations may dictate not making any or only partial deductions. However, these pronouncements do give you some options, if you desire to use them.
Hanft Fride’s business and trial lawyers are located at 1000 U.S. Bank Place, in Duluth, Minnesota. Visit our website at www.hanftlaw.com for general information on the firm and our attorneys. Our employment lawyers include Tom Torgerson, Rob Merritt and Scott Witty. Richard Burns is now of Counsel.
The information provided in this E-letter is general in nature and should not be used as a substitute for professional services and advice. The communication and receipt of this information is not intended to create an attorney-client relationship. Readers should consult with their legal counsel before taking any action on matters covered in this E‑letter.
To subscribe or unsubscribe to Employer E-Letter, e-mail your request to nrs@hanftlaw.com or call Scott Witty at 218.722.4766.
Copyright 2024 by Hanft Fride, P.A. All rights reserved. Hanft Fride, A Professional Association, 1000 U.S. Bank Place, 130 W. Superior Street, Duluth, MN 55802. Phone 218.722.4766; Fax 218.529.2401.