In many states, the practice of paying nonexempt employees a “day rate,” “shift rate” or “job rate,” is gaining in popularity. A day rate occurs when a set amount of pay is guaranteed for a shift without regard to the hours worked. The appeal is obvious. For the employee, a guaranteed day rate means the employee is paid for a full shift even if he or she completes work early. For the employer, overtime is less likely, as employees are incentivized to complete work early. For both employers and employees, a day rate offers accounting predictability. However, employers must be careful when implementing these types of shifts, as there are several potential pitfalls.
- First, a day rate is permissible only if it results in compensation of at least minimum wage for all hours worked. Accordingly, hours must still be tracked, both to comply with recordkeeping requirements and to ensure that the hourly rate exceeds the applicable minimum wage.
- Second, employees subject to day rates must still be paid overtime. In fact, the Department of Labor has pursued claims against employers for paying flat daily/shift rates without regard to how many hours the employees worked and without additional premium pay for overtime. To calculate the appropriate overtime rate for a day shift employee, multiply the amount the employee is paid for a day’s work by the number of days worked that week and then divide the weekly pay by the number of hours worked to get the employee’s “regular rate” of pay. The regular rate is then multiplied by 1.5 to come up with the overtime rate.
- Third, while federal law permits compliant day rate pay practices, this method is prohibited in some states and is regulated in others. Also, administrative complications may occur in states that have mandatory daily overtime requirements. Thus, it is essential to consult with counsel regarding applicable state law before implementing day rates.
- Fourth and finally, other factors may come in to play when determining whether a day rate is appropriate. For example, in states or cities with strict meal or rest period rules, an employee’s desire to complete a shift quickly in order to benefit from the day shift arrangement could result in violation of meal or rest period rules. There could also be safety issues associated with an employee rushing through a shift.
Accordingly, obtaining legal advice before instituting day rates, implementing proper policies governing day rates, and monitoring hours for day rates will ensure that day rates are a help, not a hindrance.
Disclaimer
This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.
Author(s)
Related Insights
23 December 2024
Labor & Employment Law Perspectives
Regulating Artificial Intelligence in Employment Decision-Making: What’s on the Horizon for 2025
Share on TwitterShare by EmailShareBack to topEmployment law in 2024 could aptly be summarized as the “Year of Artificial Intelligence Legislation.
23 December 2024
Health Care Law Today
Medicare Telehealth Flexibilities Get a Three-Month Lifeline
Share on TwitterShare by EmailShareBack to topAfter much uncertainty, Congress has extended many Medicare telehealth flexibilities through March 31, 2025, in its end-of-year appropriations bill.
20 December 2024
Health Care Law Today
GLP-1 Drugs: FDA “Re-Confirms” Decision Removing Tirzepatide from the Drug Shortage List
On December 19, 2024, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a Declaratory Order reevaluating and re-confirming that the tirzepatide drug shortage has been resolved. This order revoked and replaced FDA’s October 2, 2024, decision on tirzepatide.