Complete Labor Law Poster for $24.95
from www.LaborLawCenter.com, includes
State, Federal, & OSHA posting requirements

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Non-exempt professionals / OT over 80 hrs Arizona

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Non-exempt professionals / OT over 80 hrs Arizona

    Hello Everyone,
    So I am at a new employer and they are paying a group of people who do meet the professional exempt test as non-exempt employees. Ok so no problem. Until those EE's work any OT. They only pay OT for any hours worked over 80 in a two week period.

    So week #1 the EE works 50 hours and week #2 they work 30 hours = No overtime.

    When I questioned them, I was told that "someone" at DOL told them it was ok to pay the EEs that way because they are professionals.

    I say, yes, they COULD be exempt professional but we CHOOSE to pay them as non-exempt so we have to follow the OT rules for non-exempt.

    Am I losing my mind here or what????

    Thanks for the help!

  • #2
    If the employees are non-exempt, they need to be paid OT for hours worked over 40 in a work week. Each week stands alone.

    What are these professionals doing? (job title, duties......)
    Too often we underestimate the power of a touch, a smile, a kind word, a listening ear, an honest compliment, or the smallest act of caring, all of which have the potential to turn a life around. Leo Buscaglia

    Live in peace with animals. Animals bring love to our hearts and warmth to our souls.

    Comment


    • #3
      There is such a thing as hourly exempt, and the "professional" exemption falls into it. In that case, any OT at all is a gift.
      The above answer, whatever it is, assumes that no legally binding and enforceable contract or CBA says otherwise. If it does, then the terms of the contract or CBA apply.

      Comment


      • #4
        OP said they qualify as professional exempt so I guess they do & they are not actually non-exempt employees based on duties.....

        I was just verifying their title/duties. Non-exempt must be paid OT.

        Agree that if actually hourly exempt, any OT is a "gift".
        Too often we underestimate the power of a touch, a smile, a kind word, a listening ear, an honest compliment, or the smallest act of caring, all of which have the potential to turn a life around. Leo Buscaglia

        Live in peace with animals. Animals bring love to our hearts and warmth to our souls.

        Comment


        • #5
          It's okay, Betty, I was responding to the OP, not to you. I agree it would be good confirmation to have their titles and duties, but if he's sure they fall into the professional exempt category, then there's nothing wrong with what's happening and they are, in fact, getting more than they are entitled to by law.

          It's maybe not the smartest way of handling it, but it's legal.
          The above answer, whatever it is, assumes that no legally binding and enforceable contract or CBA says otherwise. If it does, then the terms of the contract or CBA apply.

          Comment


          • #6
            Lucky employees if they get OT as hourly exempt.
            Too often we underestimate the power of a touch, a smile, a kind word, a listening ear, an honest compliment, or the smallest act of caring, all of which have the potential to turn a life around. Leo Buscaglia

            Live in peace with animals. Animals bring love to our hearts and warmth to our souls.

            Comment


            • #7
              They are doctors so they meet the means test to be exempt.

              I searched everywhere on the DOL web site and did not find anything on hourly exempt.

              What would be the benefit to having them clock in? What risk do we put ourselves in by paying hourly exempt?

              Comment


              • #8
                Clocking in and out does not automatically make them hourly exempt. It is legal to request an employee to clock in and out no matter how they are paid and there are many reasons why it can be a good idea to do so. If there ever is an instance where you need to know whether or not an employee was at work on a particular day and time, you have the records and not just fuzzy memories. It can also be very important for safety reasons in the event of an emergency or evacuation. Sometimes it is just a morale issue so that employees are not separated into those who must use the time clock and those who are exempt.

                Practice of Law or Medicine

                An employee holding a valid license or certificate permitting the practice of law or medicine is exempt if the employee is actually engaged in such a practice. An employee who holds the requisite academic degree for the general practice of medicine is also exempt if he or she is engaged in an internship or resident program for the profession. The salary and salary basis requirements do not apply to bona fide practitioners of law or medicine.


                http://www.dol.gov/whd/regs/complian...ofessional.htm
                I post with the full knowledge and support of my employer, though the opinions rendered are my own and not necessarily representative of their position. In other words, I'm a free agent.

                Comment


                • #9
                  So we are within our legal rights to say that they can be paid OT for any hours worked over 80 because we COULD be paying them as exempt but we CHOOSE to pay them an hourly rate?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    If I can further complicate the issue, there is an industry specific exception for hospitals and non-exempt employees.
                    http://www.dol.gov/whd/regs/compliance/whdfs54.htm
                    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away".
                    Philip K. **** (1928-1982)

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Disney, you are still failing to understand that the DOL has expressly stated that while lawyers and doctors are exempt, they need not be paid on a salaried basis. They can be - they need not be. You ARE paying them as exempt, AND in addition you are paying a bonus that you are choosing to classify as OT.
                      The above answer, whatever it is, assumes that no legally binding and enforceable contract or CBA says otherwise. If it does, then the terms of the contract or CBA apply.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Thank you for the help. I should have stated what kind of doctors we were talking about...these are DVMs (vets) not medical doctors.

                        Thank you for the fact sheet on medical facilities. I come from the Human healthcare system so I will tuck that away for use in another life. :-)

                        I have never encountered an employer who paid an exempt person based on an hourly rate and the number of hours that they work so this one is throwing me for a loop.

                        Would we be better off to call the extra money something other than OT?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I would, yes. Bonuses.
                          The above answer, whatever it is, assumes that no legally binding and enforceable contract or CBA says otherwise. If it does, then the terms of the contract or CBA apply.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Are they paid overtime for the hours worked over 80 ?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by JamieHarris View Post
                              Are they paid overtime for the hours worked over 80 ?
                              Jaimie, reread the responses as this was already discussed and explained.

                              Comment

                              The LaborLawTalk.com forum is intended for informational use only and should not be relied upon and is not a substitute for legal advice. The information contained on LaborLawTalk.com are opinions and suggestions of members and is not a representation of the opinions of LaborLawTalk.com. LaborLawTalk.com does not warrant or vouch for the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any postings or the qualifications of any person responding. Please consult a legal expert or seek the services of an attorney in your area for more accuracy on your specific situation.
                              Working...
                              X