Skip to main content

One to Keep An Eye On: Helix Energy Solutions Group, Inc. v. Hewitt (U.S. Supreme Court)


As with many labor & employment law related cases (and bills) being litigated around the country, there are always a few that stand out.  This is one to keep an eye on.


Yesterday, there was a recent development from the U.S. Supreme Court that I wanted to bring to the attention of readers.  No, it is not the case you are thinking of here.

Instead, this is the Helix Energy Solutions Group, Inc. v. Hewitt case in which the Supreme Court will consider whether a highly paid employee (who made over $200,000/year) is entitled to retroactive overtime pay despite a regulation that carves out an exemption for highly paid executives, because he had been paid on a daily basis.

In broad terms, the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) provides for overtime pay for workers that are paid on an hourly basis.  A worker is considered to be paid on a salary basis, rather than hourly, if the worker “regularly receives each pay period on a weekly, or less frequent basis, a predetermined amount” and without regard for the number of days or hours worked.  These workers paid on a salary basis are not entitled to overtime pay.

In this situation, Hewitt was paid on a daily basis but was not paid overtime.  As he made over $200,000/year, Helix argued that “highly compensated executives” such as Hewitt, are barred from overtime pay under the FLSA.  (The FLSA provides an exemption for highly paid executives, such that these workers are not entitled to overtime pay.)  Going one step further, Helix  suggested that paying workers such as Hewitt a daily rate, rather than salary, is common in the industry and was not reflective of him actually being an “hourly” worker.  Hewitt counter these arguments and noted that he never knew how much he would be paid at a given time (again, under his argument that he was an hourly worker rather than receiving a salary.)

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals had previously ruled on the matter and held that the FLSA exemption did not apply as Hewitt was paid a daily rate, rather than a salary.  Helix subsequently appealed to the Supreme Court.  With the Supreme Court granting certiorari yesterday, the matter will eventually be set for an oral hearing in the fall.  Stay tuned.


For additional information:  https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docketfiles/html/public/21-984.html

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NLRB: Discussion Among Employees About Tip Pooling is Protected Concerted Activity

  This Advice Memorandum from the National Labor Relations Board’s Associate General Counsel, Jayme Sophir, addressed whether employees which discussed and complained about tip pooling at work constituted protected concerted activity. In relevant part, an employer in New York operated a chain of steakhouses.  While tip pooling was in place at these steakhouses, some of the employees objected to it on the grounds that it was not transparent and improperly divided tips among the workers.  Employees were told not to complain or talk to each other about the tip pool and were told that doing so would endanger their jobs.  Despite the employer later attempting to provide some clarity as to how the tips were being divided, rancor still existed among some employees.  At one point, the employees were told by a general manager that some employees that had been talking about the tip pool were “cleared out” and the employer would continue to do so. In the Advice Memorandum, it was noted that emplo
Post a Comment
Read more

What I’ve Been Reading This Week

A few years ago, I remember when the “Fight for $15” movement was taking off around the country.  Lo and behold, it appears that a $15/hour minimum wage is not the stopping point, which should be no surprise.  As the below article notes, New York is aggressively moving to ramp up hourly wage rates even higher.  While all the  below articles are worth a read, I called particular attention to that one. As always, below are a couple article that caught my eye this week. Disney World Workers Reject Latest Contract Offer Late last week, it was announced that workers at Disney World had rejected the most recent contract offer from the company, calling on their employer to do better.  As Brooks Barnes at The New York Times writes, the unions that represent about 32,000 workers at Disney World reported their members resoundingly rejected the 5 year contract offer which would have seen workers receive a 10% raise and retroactive increased back pay.  While Disney’s offer would have increased pa
Post a Comment
Read more

Utah Non-Compete Bill Falters in House

Last month, a non-compete bill sponsored by Representative Brian Greene (Republican from Pleasant Grove) & up for vote in the Utah House failed to make it through the Legislature.  The bill sought to ban enforcement of non-competes if they came after a worker was already employed, given no compensation (such as a bonus or promotion) for signing the non-compete, and laid off within six months.  However, by a 22 - 49 vote, the bill was resoundingly defeated after some business groups lobbied to kill the non-compete bill.  One group in particular, The Free Enterprise Utah coalition, argued that the Utah State Legislature should hold off on any changes to non compete laws in the state until a survey about non competes was done among Utah businesses.  Representative Greene had countered this claim and argued that a survey was not needed to show that the current non compete laws in the states allowed many businesses, including some small high tech companies in the state, to per
Post a Comment
Read more