For more than 70 years, the Supreme Court has construed exemptions to the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) narrowly. In A.H. Phillips, Inc. v. Walling, for example, the Court stated that “[t]o extend an exemption to other than those plainly and unmistakably within its terms and spirit is to abuse the interpretative process and to frustrate the announced will of the people.” 324 U.S. 490, 493 (1945). The Supreme Court has restated this rule many times in the intervening years, and the lower courts have followed, citing this principle in virtually every significant case ...
A Maine dairy company has received a potentially expensive grammar lesson from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, which held on March 13, 2017, that the company’s delivery drivers may be eligible for up to $10 million in overtime pay, because the lack of a comma in the statute regarding exemptions from the state’s wage and hour law rendered the scope of the exemption ambiguous.
Grammarians have long disputed whether writers should include a comma before the final item in a list—the so-called “serial” or “Oxford” comma. Opponents of the serial comma consider ...
Blog Editors
Recent Updates
- New York Enacts Amendment to Limit Frequency of Pay Damages for Manual Workers
- DOL Shelves Independent Contractor Rule
- Time Is Money: A Quick Wage and Hour Tip . . . Contractual Indemnification May Not Guard Against FLSA Claims
- California Court of Appeal Holds That Prospective Meal Waivers for Shifts Between Five and Six Hours are Enforceable
- New Jersey Supreme Court Confirms: Commissions Are Wages Under the New Jersey Wage Payment Law