We invite you to view Employment Law This Week® - a weekly rundown of the latest news in the field, brought to you by Epstein Becker Green. We look at the latest trends, important court decisions, and new developments that could impact your work. Join us every Monday for a new five-minute episode! Read the firm's press release here and subscribe for updates.

This week’s stories include ...

(1) DOL Overtime Exemption Thresholds

The Department of Labor’s (DOL’s) 2016 overtime rule has been permanently enjoined and appears to be dead in the water. With the comment period for the DOL’s new Request for Information ending last week, there will probably be a new overtime rule issued in the near future. Secretary of Labor Alexander Acosta has said that he believes the salary threshold for overtime exemptions should be around $33,000. Paul DeCamp, a former Administrator of the DOL’s Wage and Hour Division, now with Epstein Becker Green, gives us some context:

“The summary judgment ruling was actually pretty interesting, because it reaffirmed that the Department has the authority under the Fair Labor Standards Act to require some measure of a salary payment as a condition of an employee being exempt under the executive, administrative, or professional exemptions. But what the Department does not have the authority to do, in light of the court's ruling, is to set a level for the salary that is so high that it excludes a large number of people otherwise performing exempt duties. The Department has already been on record with the Fifth Circuit saying that it is not defending the salary level set in the 2016 regulation. However, the Department may still want to challenge the district court's ruling that the Department exceeded its authority when it issued the 2016 rule.”

For more, read "The Status of the Department of Labor’s 2016 Overtime Rule."  And watch the extended interview here.

(2) Recent Developments on Tip Pooling

The DOL has taken a hardline position that employers cannot dictate the distribution of customers’ tips. But the circuits are split on the issue. Under the new administration, the DOL has announced that it plans to rescind its controversial regulation restricting tip pooling and distribution. But even without a regulation from the DOL, states can still regulate the practice, and employees can still pursue private lawsuits. Until the DOL acts, employers should exercise caution, review applicable state law, and look at whether their circuit has taken a position on the existing regulations.

For more, read this story in our recent Take 5 Newsletter.

(3) SCOTUS Hears Arguments on Class Action Waivers

The Supreme Court is kicking off its fall term with oral arguments in three related cases. The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has found that mandatory arbitration and class action waivers violate employees’ rights under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). The circuits are split on the issue and have disagreed as to whether the Federal Arbitration Act trumps the NLRA or vice versa. While the High Court has been highly supportive of mandatory arbitration in recent years, it has not yet ruled on class action waivers in an employment context.

For more, read "Mandatory Class Action Waivers in Employment Agreements: Is a Final Answer Forthcoming?"

(4) “Time Rounding”: The Next Wave of Class and Collective Actions

Looking ahead to the next wave of class and collective actions, we're seeing a surge in lawsuits that focus on time-rounding policies. While rounding an employee’s time up or down is lawful as long as it’s evenhanded, the plaintiffs in these cases argue that employees are regularly disadvantaged by the practice. Facing increasing scrutiny over time-rounding policies and how they’re executed, it won’t be a surprise to see employers weighing the value of time rounding against the risk of litigation.

For more, read this story in our recent Take 5 Newsletter.

(5) Authorities Wrestle with the Definition of “Employee”

Under the Obama administration, we saw significant attempts to expand the definition of “employee” to workers who previously had been treated as independent contractors. The Wage and Hour Division issued an Administrator’s Interpretation establishing a presumption that almost anyone doing work for an employer was an “employee.” But the White House and Republicans in Congress are working to reverse this trend under the Fair Labor Standards Act and the NLRA. The DOL has withdrawn the Administrator’s Interpretation and Congress is considering several options on the issue. Steve Swirsky, from Epstein Becker Green, tells us what’s on the horizon:

“In terms of the definition of ‘employer,’ ‘employee,’ ‘independent contractor,’ and ‘joint employer,’ all of which really fit together, we're watching several pieces of key ... litigation and legislation. In the courts, we are watching, waiting for the D.C. Circuit's decision in Browning-Ferris, which was the case where the NLRB redefined ‘joint employer’ and redefined the test. I think that there is a good chance the court will not agree with the Board’s standard. We have seen Congress try to use the power of the budget to limit the NLRB's ability to enforce ... the Browning-Ferrisstandard [and] apply that for the broader joint employer. We have seen now the Save Local Business Act that was introduced in the House earlier this year, hearings took place in September. That would add a definition of ‘joint employer’ to both the Fair Labor Standards Act and the National Labor Relations Act.”

For more, read "The Department of Labor, Congress, and the Courts Wrestle with the Definition of 'Employee.'”  And watch the extended interview here.

About Employment Law This Week

Employment Law This Week® gives a rundown of the top developments in employment and labor law and workforce management in a matter of minutes every #WorkforceWednesday. 


Prefer to Listen?

You can subscribe to Employment Law This Week episodes on your preferred podcast platform – Amazon Music / AudibleApple Podcasts, Audacy, DeezerGoogle PodcastsiHeartRadio, Overcast, PandoraPlayer FM, Spotify.

Spread the Word


Would your colleagues, professional network, or friends benefit from #WorkforceWednesday? Please like and share the edition each week on LinkedInFacebook, X, and YouTube, and encourage your connections to subscribe for email notifications.

Trouble viewing the video? Please contact thisweek@ebglaw.com and mention whether you were at home or working within a corporate network. We'd also love your suggestions for topics and guests!

EMPLOYMENT LAW THIS WEEK® is a registered trademark of Epstein Becker & Green, P.C.

Back to Series
Jump to Page

Privacy Preference Center

When you visit any website, it may store or retrieve information on your browser, mostly in the form of cookies. This information might be about you, your preferences or your device and is mostly used to make the site work as you expect it to. The information does not usually directly identify you, but it can give you a more personalized web experience. Because we respect your right to privacy, you can choose not to allow some types of cookies. Click on the different category headings to find out more and change our default settings. However, blocking some types of cookies may impact your experience of the site and the services we are able to offer.

Strictly Necessary Cookies

These cookies are necessary for the website to function and cannot be switched off in our systems. They are usually only set in response to actions made by you which amount to a request for services, such as setting your privacy preferences, logging in or filling in forms. You can set your browser to block or alert you about these cookies, but some parts of the site will not then work. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable information.

Performance Cookies

These cookies allow us to count visits and traffic sources so we can measure and improve the performance of our site. They help us to know which pages are the most and least popular and see how visitors move around the site. All information these cookies collect is aggregated and therefore anonymous. If you do not allow these cookies we will not know when you have visited our site, and will not be able to monitor its performance.