My husband is being required to attend schooling for a week in January out of state. His employer made flight arrangements for him to leave on a Sunday and return on a Saturday, but does not pay his employees for this, only for 8 hours a day normal time M-F. Is this legal? Seems unfair, should he not be paid for his time from the minute he leaves the airport until he arrives at the hotel that his employer arranged?

should he not be paid for his time from the minute he leaves the airport until he arrives at the hotel that his employer arranged?

Not necessarily. If the time of travel was outside his normal work hours (no matter what day of the week), then there is no legal requirement for him to be paid for that time, if he is a passenger (as would be the case by flying, unless he is the pilot).

Thank you for the quick response. I am confused. Our local L & I office stated that if the employer is requiring that he attend, he must be compensated when required to do anything that will benefit the company. This time on Sunday and the following Saturday will be over his 40 hours during the week in which he will be attending the schooling. What about meals, etc.? In the past the employer has sometimes given $25.00 a day, regardless of where they are located - i.e. a big city where things are more costly? Also, if he refuses to go, his employer will deduct the airfare and schooling costs out of his next paycheck - so he is stuck either way - it was not an option - he was emailed that he was attending.

The company does not have to pay for meals or the time he spends consuming them. They may if they so choose but it isn't legally required.

Is your husband non-exempt or exempt? Does he normally get OT? what hours does he normally work? When are the flights?

I am unfamiliar with what you are asking on exempt vs. non-exempt. They are entitled to overtime, however his employer will not pay this - he instructs the employees that they will be leaving early on Friday instead of paying them well-earned overtime (i.e. sometimes working into the wee hours of the next am). His normal work hours are 8:00 am to 5:00 pm M-F. His flight on Sunday is leaving the airport here at 9:30 am with a 4 hour layover in another location. He will arrive at his destination at 10:30 pm that night. His returning flight is on Saturday and about the same hours. I understand the meals, and thank you - he has never expected to be compensated for the time for these, and requests only fair compensation to eat more than McDonald's and the like three times a day for a week. My husband is a non-confrontational person, as am I. This issue is leaving us both quite frustrated as he made it clear that he did not wish to go - and yet he was told he was.

OT is only earned after 40 hours in a week. If he never works 40 hours in a week, then he is not entitled to OT. If he is paid on an hourly basis then what Scott posted applies.

Wow! Thank you for your help Elle and Scott! I am so glad that I was searching the internet for some help! Don't mean to be a whiner - just want what is fair as my husband has given his all for the past 5 years and he has just been pushed too far. Since his employer has started suing every employee that has left their company now, he is very nervous about rocking the boat in any way, shape or form, however he does not like giving up our weekends together - at least not to be traveling away and without compensation. The past employees have been served with papers for breach of a supposed "non-compete" agreement which my husband does not remember ever being presented with or signing - and his employer will not allow him to see his employment file. According to the other guys, the agreement basically states they cannot do anything even resembling their line of work anywhere in the US - and the agreement has one of his former company's name on it, not their existing company. It is all a terrible mess - the guys have other jobs but their new employers are the ones served the papers for hiring them - makes for a sticky situation for them. Therefore, my husband is afraid to find another job for fear that this will happen to him as well. Many concerns - sorry - but you have been so helpful so far - how does he just get out? Again, if he refuses to attend this schooling, his employer states he will deduct the fee for the airfare and schooling out of his next paycheck and we cannot afford this. He said he did not want to go and to send the new employee - but not the case. :confused:

If they want him to go- he goes. The fact that he doesn't want to does not really factor in.

Has he asked for a copy of the non-compete? I don't see why they would not provide it if asked as it costs them big money to sue for violating it.

Thank you again ElleMD. I completely understand that he needs to go regardless of his feelings. Please don't think him a bad person. This is a very, very small company - only 5 employees, he is the one employed the longest. His employer is really strange about their records, he keeps track of their time, sick days, etc. all written out on a hand-made chart, not even an Excel spreadsheet - regardless of what the employees submit. I will share with my husband all that you and Scott have advised us today and again, many thanks. Any advise for a man who is 57 and looking to advance himself and prepare for retirement? He has applied but been turned down due to his age, unfortunately - and is concerned that most jobs now state a college degree is required and he is of the age where he has taken the various courses at vocational schools, etc. and OTJ experience instead. This man is incredible and can figure anything out! He absolutely amazes people at his analytical mind with computers, wiring, etc. Looking to move forward and upward! Thank you again for you assistance! Leed:D

the agreement basically states they cannot do anything even resembling their line of work anywhere in the US - and the agreement has one of his former company's name on it, not their existing company.

Some states don't allow non-competes at all. Some allow them, but refuse to enforce stupid provisions, like not allowing an employee to work anywhere in the US for any other company in any other job. Generally, the agreements need to be limited in time and geographical location (I suppose some exceptions would apply, depending upon the industry). I really would not worry about this mythical agreement.

It is all a terrible mess - the guys have other jobs but their new employers are the ones served the papers for hiring them - makes for a sticky situation for them.

Given that the new employer is the target, not the ex-employee, I suspect this is a low cost way of getting the new employer to terminate the new hire. They will be concerned about the costs of litigation and will simply terminate the employee. Cheap.

if he refuses to attend this schooling, his employer states he will deduct the fee for the airfare and schooling out of his next paycheck and we cannot afford this.

Illegal for the company to dock his pay without his express agreement.

And he wants to keep working for this shady outfit because???

Thank you Scott! Great information! You are right - cheap! And yes, the employees were terminated from those places of employment - sadly - except for one. He is in the process of court hearings, the judge refused to dismiss the case on the basis of being written with verbage from another company formerly owned by this employer - and that it was drafted from a different county than the one employed in. This person has relocated to Texas (coincidence) and his employer is backing him the whole way. Had to chuckle at your question as to why my husband chooses to remain employed with this man - he doesn't!!! Are you hiring?! :) My husband is a good, honest and loyal person. To show you - he has declined all other offers for schooling as he felt it unfair to attend training and then not remain employed with this firm as it would be unfair of him to do so - however this training is mandatory and in order to be able to service the equipment that they are now going to be selling. Thank you for the input on the withholding from his pay - he will try to do it and we will have to fight to get it back - that is the problem - in this day and age we cannot do without that chunk of pay and wait to be compensated once he is proven wrong. However, we will have to cross that bridge if and when we come to it. The "mythical agreement" is just a pain in the neck and creates for a tense environment for the current employees as well as the men that have left - again a cheap shot from the employer - but that is the way he operates. The guys really support each other and have all offered to testify if it comes to that. Nobody is trying to steal business from this employer. My husband is actively looking for different employment - preferrably in another state - we are praying for something and soon! Thanks again!

:)

This portion of the law may or may not be applicable to your husband's situation...

http://www.dol.gov/dol/allcfr/ESA/Title_29/Part_785/Subpart_C.htm

§ 785.37 Home to work on special one-day assignment in another city.
A problem arises when an employee who regularly works at a fixed location in one city is given a special 1-day work assignment in another city. For example, an employee who works in Washington, DC, with regular working hours from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. may be given a special assignment in New York City, with instructions to leave Washington at 8 a.m. He arrives in New York at 12 noon, ready for work. The special assignment is completed at 3 p.m., and the employee arrives back in Washington at 7 p.m. Such travel cannot be regarded as ordinary home-to-work travel occasioned merely by the fact of employment. It was performed for the employer’s benefit and at his special request to meet the needs of the particular and unusual assignment. It would thus qualify as an integral part of the ‘‘principal’’ activity which the employee was hired to perform on the workday in question; it is like travel involved in an emergency call (described in § 785.36), or like travel that is all in the day’s work (see § 785.38). All the time involved, however, need not be counted. Since, except for the special assignment, the employee would have had to report to his regular work site, the travel between his home and the railroad depot may be deducted, it being in the ‘‘home-to-work’’ category. Also, of course, the usual meal time would be deductible.

This portion of the law may or may not be applicable to your husband's situation...

http://www.dol.gov/dol/allcfr/ESA/Title_29/Part_785/Subpart_C.htm

§ 785.37 Home to work on special one-day assignment in another city.
A problem arises when an employee who regularly works at a fixed location in one city is given a special 1-day work assignment in another city. For example, an employee who works in Washington, DC, with regular working hours from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. may be given a special assignment in New York City, with instructions to leave Washington at 8 a.m. He arrives in New York at 12 noon, ready for work. The special assignment is completed at 3 p.m., and the employee arrives back in Washington at 7 p.m. Such travel cannot be regarded as ordinary home-to-work travel occasioned merely by the fact of employment. It was performed for the employer’s benefit and at his special request to meet the needs of the particular and unusual assignment. It would thus qualify as an integral part of the ‘‘principal’’ activity which the employee was hired to perform on the workday in question; it is like travel involved in an emergency call (described in § 785.36), or like travel that is all in the day’s work (see § 785.38). All the time involved, however, need not be counted. Since, except for the special assignment, the employee would have had to report to his regular work site, the travel between his home and the railroad depot may be deducted, it being in the ‘‘home-to-work’’ category. Also, of course, the usual meal time would be deductible.

And this does NOT apply, since this is not a "one-day assignment". It is a week.

The regulation that applies is this one:

Travel away from home community.
Travel that keeps an employee away from home overnight is travel
away from home. Travel away from home is clearly worktime when it cuts
across the employee's workday. The employee is simply substituting
travel for other duties. The time is not only hours worked on regular
working days during normal working hours but also during the
corresponding hours on nonworking days. Thus, if an employee regularly
works from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. from Monday through Friday the travel time
during these hours is worktime on Saturday and Sunday as well as on the
other days. Regular meal period time is not counted. As an enforcement
policy the Divisions will not consider as worktime that time spent in
travel away from home outside of regular working hours as a passenger on
an airplane, train, boat, bus, or automobile.
(underline emphasis mine)

In other words, if he travels as a passenger (which he would be, since he lives in Texas and will be attending the training in Washington), the travel on Saturday or Sunday during his regular working hours (discounting the regular meal time) is compensable.

And, generally speaking, the time spent getting to the airport, checking in, and waiting, is not compensable, although, if it were me, I would pay it.