Wage & Hour Defense Blog : Wage & Hour Lawyer & Attorney : Epstein Becker Green Law Firm : DOL Enforcement, FLSA Coverage

By Betsy Johnson

President Obama just celebrated his first year in office and his Administration has been busy! Employers of all sizes are starting to see the effects of the Obama Administration’s workplace agenda; especially at the Department of Labor (DOL). The watchword for all employers in the wage/hour arena for 2010 is “compliance.”  The DOL is slated to receive a substantial budget increase this year and it is going on a hiring spree to increase the number of investigators and enforcement personnel. 

The DOL’s agenda includes increased audit and enforcement proceedings related to “off the clock” work and the misclassification of employees as “exempt” under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). In addition, the DOL (in cooperation with the IRS) will focus its audit and enforcement proceeding on employers who misclassify individuals as independent contractors.  Now, more than ever, employers must have programs in place to ensure compliance with the myriad of wage/hour laws and regulations, and implement a clear strategy for handling government audits and enforcement actions. While the thought of conducting a comprehensive payroll practices compliance audit can be daunting, employers can efficiently conduct “spot” audits of particular areas where they may be vulnerable. 

As an initial matter, employers should determine who will conduct the audits. Utilizing internal resources such as the Human Resources and/or Payroll Departments and/or the company’s General Counsel will help keep the costs down. However, using internal resources may not guarantee that the results will be protected by the attorney-client privilege should the company become involved in litigation regarding the subject matter of the audit. As such, employers may wish to seek assistance of outside counsel to conduct the audit and analyze the results.

The purpose of these “spot” audits is to: 1) identify areas of non-compliance; 2) identify policies, procedures and/or practices that can be improved; 3) develop a plan for improvement; and 4) implement the plan. The areas where most employers are vulnerable to government actions and employee claims in the wage/hour area are:

•         Overtime calculation and payment

•         Off the clock work

•         “Donning and doffing” issues

•         Classification of employees (exempt v. non-exempt)

•         Time keeping

•         Recordkeeping

•         Proper classification of independent contractors

In planning a “spot” audit, employers should determine: 1) the scope and depth of the audit; 2) what data needs to be collected; 3) what documents need to be reviewed; 4) which managers should be interviewed to obtain relevant information; and 5) whether the employees should be surveyed for relevant information. On a cautionary note, if the employer believes there may be too many “skeletons in the closet” that may be exposed in an audit, consideration should be given to retaining outside counsel to assist in the audit so that the process and the results can be protected by the attorney-client privilege.

Finally, employers must decide what to do with the results of the audit. Some things to consider are: 1) who will be apprised of the results and how (written or verbal); 2) will the person who conducted the audit make recommendations regarding problem areas; 3) what, if anything, is going to be done about any problems; 4) how should any changes be implemented (a “spin doctor” may be needed); and 5) how is the employer going to address employee questions and challenges.

In the short-term, the exercise of conducting internal audits may be viewed as a distraction from an employer’s business purpose. In the long run, however, getting the company’s “house in order” before a government agency knocks on the door will save time, attorneys’ fees and the intangible costs of being embroiled in administrative or civil litigation. Remember the old adage: “An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.”

A number of recent lawsuits illustrate how changing workplace technology can form the basis for creative FLSA lawsuits.  A wave of claims have been brought against Fortune 500 companies alleging that non-exempt employees have not been paid for "off the clock "duties such as logging into computer systems and responding to email and text messages after work hours and on weekends.

Putting aside the merits of these cases, this trend illustrates the legal implications of introducing technology into the workplace, especially when used by non exempt employees to work remotely.  These cases are a good reminder of why every company should make sure that its payroll practices keep up with the fast pace of technological change, and capture all work related activities, whether they occur at work, at home, or via new channels of communication like blackberries or text messaging.

Some practical tips to minimize these types of claims include:

• Implement a clear "off the clock" policy requiring employees to report all work time regardless of where and when it occurs.
• Train supervisors to never request an employee to work off the clock.
• If issuing blackberries or remote access technology to non-exempt employees, consider requirement for them to sign an acknowledgment form noting the obligation to report all work time.
• If non-exempt employees log in and out of work on their computers, consider allowing employees to manually input time instead of automatic time stamping (which will eliminate claims for lost time due to lengthy start ups or other required steps before accessing payroll software).

Staying one step ahead of creative FLSA attorneys is no doubt difficult in today's ever changing workplace.  For that reason, we strongly recommend annual audits of payroll practices to ensure that polices and procedures are updated to adapt to technological or other changes which might have significant wage and hour implications.

Times are tough out there.  Company budgets are being slashed, along with the number of employees and available hours.  Many supervisors suddenly find their departments doing the same amount of work with half the people.  On the overtime front, this is a recipe for a disaster.

Under these conditions, many supervisors are trapped with little ability to approve overtime.  Hard working employees may not even request approval for overtime knowing that it will be viewed as an admission they cannot perform their job at the expected level (and thus place them at the top of the list for the next round of layoffs).   Overtime therefore goes underground - a tacit understanding exists between management and employees that no one will mention how the work gets done as long as it gets done and everyone keeps their jobs.

Of course, the above scenario is unlawful, and whatever the company saves in wages will be dwarfed by attorneys fees and damages in the class action lawsuit surely to follow.  For that reason, now is the time to remind all managers and supervisors of the importance of the company's off the clock policy.   Looking the other way to save in the short run is not a smart business move, and will inevitably come home to roost in the form of a disgruntled employee or ex-employee who reveals the practice.