I work for a Nationwide company in California and was notified that the company has minimum pay requirment zones. I am salaried and underpaid according to the zone and my manager, yet will not see appropriate pay until reviews next year. I have no contract with the company, however all salaried employees are considered exempt according to our policies and procedures. I make less than the $455 a week (I have noticed this number in several other postings) by a few dollars. Without a contract, should I still be able to get the current pay as defined by the company and/or retroactive pay from the date that the company put the pay zones in action? My manager claims to not have known about the pay zone increases. This is important as it could involve several thousand dollars yearly yet I need more facts before I stir the pot.

Whether or not it is "fair" or not, there is no law requiring that an employer ever grant raises, unless you are being paid minimum wage and Congress or your state legislature increases the required minimum.

However, $455/week is the federal minimum salary for exempt employees. California's minimum is higher than that, although I can't find the exact amount right now; I think it's somewhere around $625/week.

That would be the legal violation.

My husband was notified verbally at the beginning of September that he should expect a pay decrease of 10% effective October 1st, so we were expecting his October 15th to reflect the decrease, it didn't. He is a salaried employee. He never saw the decrease until this November 30th pay day (today). It now appears they are making it retroactive as he is missing more than 10%. He hasn't quite figured out what they're doing there yet.

His question is, do they have to notify him in writing about this pay decrease or is a verbal enough? He was under the impression if they changed his pay, up or down, he should sign something.

He's currently looking for new work.

Tammy

Verbal is sufficient.

I do think your husband should speak to his supervisor about his paycheck, since the decrease in pay is more than 10%. At the very least, your husband should understand exactly what's going on with his compensation and his paycheck.

Second question. If he was notified his pay decrease would be effective 10/1 and it wasn't reflected on his paycheck until 11/30, basicially 3 paychecks later, can they legally take the pay retroactively.

Third question. Was he at fault for not notifying them that the decrease hadn't taken effect yet when he received his 10/15, 10/30 and 11/15 paystubs.

With so much icky politics going on at his place of employement he was a little scared to bring it up.

Tammy

Thanks for the quick response. It seems that I fall under the exempt classification according to the Fair Labor Standards Act and that in California, a salaried position must be no less that 2 times the minimum wage for full time employees (40 hours a week). Ca minimum is 6.75. I calculate $540 per week or $2160 per month. Is the company responsible for rectroactive pay or would that be courtesy by the company?

It is always important to note what the law is and then apply it to your case. All the talk about exempt, non-exempt, salary, etc is used to determine one and only one thing -- if you are entitled to overtime for work over 40 hours in a week and 8 hours in a day.

If you never worked more than 8/40, then it doesn't matter if you are exempt or not.

If you worked more than 8/40 then you look at whether you are "exempt". To be exempt, you must make more than 2x the minimum wage or a flat 40 hour week. Your calculations on this were correct. If you make less than this, then you are entitled to overtime pay for all hours worked. You are not entitled to a pay raise. If you worked significant overtime, then you would not want to allow the employer to simply give you the proper salary. You would be better off with the overtime pay.

If you make less than $455/week you are entitled to overtime pay for all hours worked over 8/40. In addition, if you sue in court, you are entitled to double damages. Many people take claims like this to the labor commission. You can do this, but the labor commission can not award you double damages.

Please note that the double damages are only on hours over 40 in a week. State law does not allow for double damages except in the garment industry.

Also, please note that just because you do make fore tha $455 per week, it does not mean that you are exempt. There are a bunch of additional requirements as well.

Finally, in California, you must make more the $540 to be exempt (plus meet all the other requirements). However, if you make less than $455 per week, you are automatically entitled to double damages under federal law. That is why I have put in all the discussion about state vs federal.

I hope the above helps to explain the basics of California overtime law. It can get confusing at times.