Royal

Clarification on FLSA Overtime by Federal Appeals Court

February 1, 2023

Under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), employees are considered to have worked overtime when they work more than forty (40) hours in a single work week. Those employees are then owed time-and-a-half for their overtime work. However, salaried workers whose primary duties are related to the higher-level management of business functions, such as accounting or human resources operations, are exempt from those requirements.



In the case of Walsh v. Unitil Service Corp., a lower court failed to use relational analysis in determining whether claimants were “administrative” employees exempt from the federal Fair Labor Standards Act.


The opinion, issued on January 11th, 2023, stems from a dispute over whether dispatchers and controllers managed their employer’s business operations. Doing so would exempt those employees from the overtime rules.


The Appeals Court ruled that the lower court had wrongly determined that dispatchers and controllers working for Unitil, who spent roughly 60 percent of their workdays monitoring electrical and gas pipeline systems, were engaged in regulatory compliance, quality control, and health and safety tasks. While dispatchers and controllers were tasked with monitoring gas and electric distribution networks, they were not designing, planning, testing, or evaluating those systems.


The Appeals Court held that the duties of dispatchers and controllers working for Unitil, “. . . lack the level of generality required by the regulation and the case law to conclude, without further inquiry, that they were engaged in ‘management or general business operations’ as opposed to routine, day-to-day affairs.”


Therefore, the Appeals Court has remanded the case back to the lower court.


If your business has any questions on this topic or any other matters, please do not hesitate to contact the attorneys at The Royal Law Firm at 413-586-2288.  

Massachusetts Wage Act Claims for Unpaid Bonuses Dismissed

March 5, 2025
A recent Massachusetts ruling regarding unpaid bonuses is extremely important for employers in light of the wave of litigation involving the Massachusetts Wage Act. In this case, Plaintiff brought claims under the Massachusetts Wage Act for unpaid bonuses under ERISA, alleging that her former employer deprived her of guaranteed bonus payments. This case is of particular interest as it is rare for a court to consider the substantive nature of a case during the dismissal stage. However, in this case, the judge ruled on the substantive nature of the wages Plaintiff claimed, outside of the purview of a typical motion to dismiss decision. The court decided that the compensation of a bonus under ERISA is “discretionary or contingent upon the employee remaining with the company [and] is not considered a wage subject to the wage act” and dismissed the claims of unpaid wages, only allowing the retaliation claims to proceed. The judge found that bonuses did not constitute wages as they are not earned. This decision can help to decrease employers’ concerns about wage claims, particularly those related to bonuses and deferred compensation.  If your business has any questions on this topic or any other matters, please do not hesitate to contact the attorneys at The Royal Law Firm at 413-586-2288.

Recent Department of Education Investigation has Created More Questions Regarding DEI-Type Protocols for Employers

February 26, 2025
Recent executive orders issued by the executive branch have raised questions for many employers, especially relating to DEI policies. While it was initially interpreted that the executive orders regarding the presence of DEI policies only applied to federal agencies and companies that receive federal funds, a recent investigation by the Department of Education has raised questions about whether privately funded organizations and companies could face prosecution.  In Massachusetts, the Massachusetts Interscholastic Athletic Association (as known as MIAA), a program not directly funded by the federal government, is being investigated by the Department of Education for an alleged violation of Title IX in allowing transgender individuals to participate in women’s sports. While MIAA’s policy is loosely related to DEI protocols, this investigation seems to declare that support of DEI-type programs and policies by private companies can be prosecuted akin to this investigation. It is investigations such as these that has led to a movement called “rainbow-hushing,” in which companies drop or quietly rebrand their diversity, equity and inclusion programs to avoid prosecution. While confusion and contradictions between anti-discrimination laws and the new wave of executive orders issued by the executive branch remain abound, it is prudent practice to seek legal counsel to avoid prosecution under the new executive orders, akin to MIAA. If your business has any questions on this topic or any other matters, please do not hesitate to contact the attorneys at The Royal Law Firm at 413-586-2288.
Share by: