Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Labor & Employment Law Blogs -> Wage & Hour - Development & Highlights
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Labor & Employment Law
: Wage & Hour - Development & HighlightsOh No! Reclassification From Exempt To Non-Exempt Prompts Class Action
By Mark Tabakman
A federal judge has granted conditional class certification to a class of workers at a subsidiary of ATT, who are alleging a failure to pay overtime. The case is entitled Wlotkowski et al. v. Michigan Bell Telephone Company, filed in the Eastern District of Michigan.
These outside plant engineers made a sufficient showing to the judge for her to order conditional certification and the sending of the opt-in notices to similarly situated people. The company must provide names and addresses within ten days so that opt-in notices may be sent. These employees draft plans which are then used by other employees use to install telephone lines in their proper locations.
The issue arose when the Company reclassified the workers from exempt to non-exempt under the Fair Labor Standards Act ('FLSA'). This is a red flag for employees and Department of Labor alike, because the employees questioned (as anyone would) if their duties were identical pre and post re-classification, why were they not getting overtime pay prior to the re-classification. Instant lawsuit! Moreover, the Company does not dispute that the employees worked in excess of forty (40) hours per week during the relevant time period (i.e. three years prior to date of complaint filing).
The thrust of the workers claim is that they are not 'engineers,' as they hold no professional degrees which would qualify them for the professional exemption. They claim their duties are more clerical in nature and they do not exercise any managerial or supervisory responsibilities. Interestingly enough, they all hold the title of 'Manager, Outside Plant Planning Engineering and Design.'
This case highlights two significant problems. First, titles mean nothing. Calling someone a 'Manager' does not qualify them for any exemption. The analysis, whether by a DOL, or a court, will always be on what the actual duties are.
Second, more importantly, employers who set about to re-classify workers must be aware of what their possible back pay exposure will be (because all it takes is one person to complain, or sue) and either proactively deal with that, i.e. pay it, or develop a sufficiently polished spin when employees are informed of the reclassification to (hopefully) avoid any one complaining or suing. Not an easy task! Either way.
Full post as published by Wage & Hour - Development & Highlights on April 21, 2010 (boomark / email).
Paxil Lawsuit
Paxil Claims, Lawsuits, and Injuries
Passport Delays
Prompts Class Action
Princeton Review
Sarasota Student Data Breach Prompts Class Action
Peanut Risk Prompts Nestle Recall
Peanut Risk Prompts Nestle Recall
FDA Review of Prostate Cancer Treatment Prompts Warning of Risk for Diabetes
Prostate Cancer Treatment FDA Review Prompts Warning of Risk for Diabetes
Xigris
Study Prompts FDA Safety Review
Healon D
Reports of Postoperative Eye Problems Prompts FDA Recall

SOI Releases 2007 Tax-Exempt Bond Data
Helping Tax-Exempt Hospitals Keep Their Tax-Exempt Status
Wikipedia's British Cousin, Wikimedia UK, Ruled Not Tax Exempt
IRS Examines <1% of Exempt Organizations Each Year
IRS Announces Public Meeting of ACT, Names New Members
Exemption in Proceeds of Sale of Exempt Property Upheld








