Artwork

Treść dostarczona przez The Federalist Society. Cała zawartość podcastów, w tym odcinki, grafika i opisy podcastów, jest przesyłana i udostępniana bezpośrednio przez The Federalist Society lub jego partnera na platformie podcastów. Jeśli uważasz, że ktoś wykorzystuje Twoje dzieło chronione prawem autorskim bez Twojej zgody, możesz postępować zgodnie z procedurą opisaną tutaj https://pl.player.fm/legal.
Player FM - aplikacja do podcastów
Przejdź do trybu offline z Player FM !

Deep Dive Episode 244 - Litigation Update: Helix Energy v. Hewitt

59:53
 
Udostępnij
 

Manage episode 346359936 series 3276400
Treść dostarczona przez The Federalist Society. Cała zawartość podcastów, w tym odcinki, grafika i opisy podcastów, jest przesyłana i udostępniana bezpośrednio przez The Federalist Society lub jego partnera na platformie podcastów. Jeśli uważasz, że ktoś wykorzystuje Twoje dzieło chronione prawem autorskim bez Twojej zgody, możesz postępować zgodnie z procedurą opisaną tutaj https://pl.player.fm/legal.
Some employers were surprised by the en banc Fifth Circuit’s December 2021 decision in Helix Energy Solutions Group, Inc. v. Hewitt that a supervisor for an offshore oil company who received approximately $1,000 per day for a total of over $200,000 annually was eligible for overtime pay under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
The Act exempts from overtime pay workers “employed in a bona fide executive, administrative, or professional capacity,” and the oil company argued that a highly compensated supervisor like Mr. Hewitt qualifies for this “EAP” exemption. The en banc Fifth Circuit applied a Department of Labor regulation requiring EAP-exempt employees to have a fixed weekly salary to conclude that, notwithstanding high pay and supervisory duties, Mr. Hewitt was non-exempt because he was paid on a daily rather than weekly basis.
However, that argument has not been accepted across the bench. Judge Jones dissented that the weekly salary rule is inapplicable for workers who satisfy a separate regulatory requirement for exempt “highly compensated employees” who make over $100,000 per year (now $107,432). Judge Wiener’s dissent added that application of the weekly salary rule—which dates from 1940s—is illogical and unreasonable under the circumstances. DOL took no view on this case.
Additionally, Helix Energy created an apparent split with the First and Second Circuits, and the Supreme Court granted on certiorari May 2, 2022. Oral argument took place October 12. If the Court upholds the decision, employers that relied on the First and Second Circuits may face significant retroactive liability.
In this podcast, experts provide a litigation update on Helix Energy, what it is, what the possible outcomes may be, and the potential consequences of the same.
Featuring:
Dave Dorey, Senior Litigation Counsel, The Fairness Center
Timothy Taylor, Partner, Holland & Knight LLP
[Moderator] Sheng Li, Litigation Counsel, New Civil Liberties Alliance
Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.
  continue reading

374 odcinków

Artwork
iconUdostępnij
 
Manage episode 346359936 series 3276400
Treść dostarczona przez The Federalist Society. Cała zawartość podcastów, w tym odcinki, grafika i opisy podcastów, jest przesyłana i udostępniana bezpośrednio przez The Federalist Society lub jego partnera na platformie podcastów. Jeśli uważasz, że ktoś wykorzystuje Twoje dzieło chronione prawem autorskim bez Twojej zgody, możesz postępować zgodnie z procedurą opisaną tutaj https://pl.player.fm/legal.
Some employers were surprised by the en banc Fifth Circuit’s December 2021 decision in Helix Energy Solutions Group, Inc. v. Hewitt that a supervisor for an offshore oil company who received approximately $1,000 per day for a total of over $200,000 annually was eligible for overtime pay under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
The Act exempts from overtime pay workers “employed in a bona fide executive, administrative, or professional capacity,” and the oil company argued that a highly compensated supervisor like Mr. Hewitt qualifies for this “EAP” exemption. The en banc Fifth Circuit applied a Department of Labor regulation requiring EAP-exempt employees to have a fixed weekly salary to conclude that, notwithstanding high pay and supervisory duties, Mr. Hewitt was non-exempt because he was paid on a daily rather than weekly basis.
However, that argument has not been accepted across the bench. Judge Jones dissented that the weekly salary rule is inapplicable for workers who satisfy a separate regulatory requirement for exempt “highly compensated employees” who make over $100,000 per year (now $107,432). Judge Wiener’s dissent added that application of the weekly salary rule—which dates from 1940s—is illogical and unreasonable under the circumstances. DOL took no view on this case.
Additionally, Helix Energy created an apparent split with the First and Second Circuits, and the Supreme Court granted on certiorari May 2, 2022. Oral argument took place October 12. If the Court upholds the decision, employers that relied on the First and Second Circuits may face significant retroactive liability.
In this podcast, experts provide a litigation update on Helix Energy, what it is, what the possible outcomes may be, and the potential consequences of the same.
Featuring:
Dave Dorey, Senior Litigation Counsel, The Fairness Center
Timothy Taylor, Partner, Holland & Knight LLP
[Moderator] Sheng Li, Litigation Counsel, New Civil Liberties Alliance
Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.
  continue reading

374 odcinków

Wszystkie odcinki

×
 
Loading …

Zapraszamy w Player FM

Odtwarzacz FM skanuje sieć w poszukiwaniu wysokiej jakości podcastów, abyś mógł się nią cieszyć już teraz. To najlepsza aplikacja do podcastów, działająca na Androidzie, iPhonie i Internecie. Zarejestruj się, aby zsynchronizować subskrypcje na różnych urządzeniach.

 

Skrócona instrukcja obsługi