Final Regulations That Make it Harder for Businesses to do Business

Apr 23, 2024

NUMBER 1:


he Department of Labor, DOL, issued a final rule raising the salary that an employee must be paid to be Exempt from overtime pay, “OT” under the so-called white-collar Exemptions: Executive; Professional; Administrative; and Computer Employees. On July 1, 2024, the minimum salary to qualify for these Exemptions will jump from $684 per week ($35,568 annually) to $844 per week ($43,888 annually). Then, it will increase to $1,128 per week ($58,656 annually) on January 1, 2025. Please remember that there are other requirements which must be met to properly classify an employee as Exempt, i.e. be paid on a Salary Basis; and perform specific duties.


The objective and effect of these changes is to make more employees eligible for OT pay, which will obviously make it more costly for many employers to do business. The DOL estimates that these changes will impact 4 million employees.


So, what should employers do now?


  • Create a list of Exempt employees who earn less than the new required salary amounts, and decide whether to increase their salary or convert them to Non-Exempt. The number of hours over 40 an employee works (potential OT hours) should be considered in measuring the financial impact of this decision. Additionally, the affect on employee morale must be considered. For example, a supervisor converted from Exempt to Non-Exempt may be demoralized by having to clock in and out with subordinates.
  • Communicate changes to Exempt status, or compensation, individually (if possible). An increase in pay to comply with the new levels will obviously be a positive conversation, while those with employees who are reclassified will be more challenging, and should include information about tracking time worked more closely (lunch breaks, after hours communications, etc.). Employees who are reclassified can be told that such is being done to comply with the federal government’s new wage and hour rules.


* Legal challenges to the new rules are likely, however, prudent employers should begin planning for them to take effect as scheduled, as there is no certainty as to the outcome of those challenges. We will provide updates.


NUMBER 2:


The Fair Trade Commission, FTC, issued a final rule that will prohibit employers from utilizing non-compete agreements with almost all employees. Specifically, under the rule, employers will no longer be able to:


  • Enter into non-compete agreements with employees; or
  • Enforce existing non-compete agreements, unless they are with “Senior Executives,” defined as those earning more than $151,164 annually, with policy making responsibilities.


Additionally, before the effective date of the rule, employers will be required to provide an explicit Notice to employees and former employees that their non-compete agreements are no longer enforceable.

Important notes:


  • The rule can’t take effect until August 22 (120 days after it was published in the Federal Register).
  • The rule includes model language for the Notice.
  • The rule does Not ban other restrictive agreements, such as: customer non-solicitation agreements; confidentiality agreements; non-disclosure agreements; and employee non-solicitation agreements.
  • Lawsuits challenging the new rule have already been filed, and more will follow. What will happen with those is anybody’s guess.


So, what should employers do now?



  • Develop a Game Plan in light of the new rule. Outside counsel may be utilized to develop a comprehensive plan to protect company interests and information. This can be through the use of the other types of restrictive agreements, as well as Trade Secret protection.
  • Put together a list of employees who would be required to receive Notice under the new rule.
  • Monitor the court cases.

Recent Posts

01 Oct, 2024
Employers should take note that the EEOC has filed at least 3 lawsuits in the past month related to the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, PWFA, which took effect in June of last year. We believe these are the initial lawsuits filed by the EEOC, and most likely indicates that this is a new strategic point of emphasis for the EEOC. What are the cases about? In one case, a pregnant employee who worked on an assembly line requested an accommodation that would not require excessive bending or lying on her stomach. The employer placed her on leave without engaging in the interactive discussion process with her, which constituted a forced accommodation according to the lawsuit. In another case, the employer refused to excuse an employee’s absences for pregnancy-related conditions and medical appointments and required her to work mandatory overtime despite knowing that her physician had restricted her from working over forty hours per week during her pregnancy. Because of her pregnancy-related absences, the company assessed attendance points against her and warned that she would be terminated if she acquired another point. As a result, the employee resigned to avoid termination and protect her pregnancy. In the third case, a specialty medical practice did not allow a medical assistant to sit, take breaks, or work part-time as her physician had advised to protect her health and safety during the final trimester of her high-risk pregnancy. Instead, the practice forced her to take unpaid leave and refused to guarantee she would have breaks to express breastmilk. When she would not return to work without those guaranteed breaks, her employment was terminated. What should employers do? They should review their accommodations policies to ensure that that they include requests related to pregnancy, childbirth, and related medical conditions. This may also include creating or revising interactive process paperwork that should be used to review requests for accommodations, and engage in the required interactive process. By doing so, the risk of failing to engage in the interactive process with pregnant employees who are in need of an accommodation can be reduced, and there will be documentation of the process itself. The EEOC has provided examples of possible reasonable accommodations: Frequent breaks; Sitting or standing; Schedule changes, part-time work, and paid and unpaid leave; Telework; Parking; Light duty; Making existing facilities accessible or modifying the work environment; Job restructuring; Temporarily suspending one or more essential function; Acquiring or modifying equipment, uniforms, or devices; and Adjusting or modifying examinations or policies. The analysis to consider whether an accommodation request is an undue hardship is whether it causes significant difficulty or expense for the employer’s operations. Under the PWFA, employers must conduct an individualized assessment when determining whether an accommodation will impose an undue burden. If you believe a request constitutes an undue hardship, you should review the matter thoroughly with your HR advisor.
21 Aug, 2024
Yesterday, a Texas federal court struck down the FTC’s proposed ban on non-competition agreements on a nationwide basis , meaning employers will not have to comply with the proposed Rule, and can continue to maintain non-competes as their state laws allow. While there is a slim chance the Rule could be resurrected by a federal appeals court in the future, that is doubtful at best. In case you missed it, here is information regarding the now invalid Rule from our April 24 Newsletter on this topic: The Fair Trade Commission, FTC, issued a final Rule that would have prohibited employers from utilizing non-compete agreements with almost all employees. Specifically, under the Rule, employers would have no longer been able to: Enter into non-compete agreements with employees; or Enforce existing non-compete agreements, unless they are with “Senior Executives,” defined as those earning more than $151,164 annually, with policy making responsibilities.  Additionally, before the effective date of the Rule, employers would have been required to provide an explicit Notice to employees and former employees that their non-compete agreements were no longer enforceable.
23 Apr, 2024
The Department of Labor, DOL, issued a final rule raising the salary that an employee must be paid to be Exempt from overtime pay, “OT” under the so-called white-collar Exemptions: Executive; Professional; Administrative; and Computer Employees. On July 1, 2024, the minimum salary to qualify for these Exemptions will jump from $684 per week
16 Apr, 2024
As you may recall, we sent out an AHEAD Newsletter last May regarding the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act “PWFA,” which went into effect last June 27. As a refresher, the law: Covers employers with 15 or more employees. Protects employees and applicants who have limitations related to pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions.
21 Feb, 2024
A recent case from the Eighth Federal Circuit Court raises an issue about a longstanding common practice of some employers use of rounding policies when tracking hours worked by employees. In the case, the employer used an automated timekeeping system which rounded to the next quarter hour when an employee clocked in within 6 minutes of the scheduled shift start time, or out within 6 minutes of the scheduled end time.
Share by: