Help with this please

njjel

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 04-07-05 AT 11:17AM (CST)[/font][br][br]Management has agreed to let a salaried employee (she is an attorney) reduce her work schedule to a "work when I can" type of thing! Management wants to keep her as salaried because they say she is a professional (her hours will be between 0 and 21 per week). I say that we need to change her to hourly as if she works less than 21 hours per week will are obligated to pay her for the full 21 hours. Am I correct in this?

Geno

njjel,

???????????????
"...as if she works less than 21 hours per week will are obligated to pay her for the full 21 hours."

If I understand your question, the answer is yes.

geno

Crout

I'm not sure where you're getting that 21-hour rule. If she is "salaried" as defined by FLSA, and she works ONE hour a week (or shows up but does no work at all) you are obligated to pay her full salary, but that might be a bargain for your company, depending on what her salary is.

jmcaa

If her original salary was based on her working 40 + hours per week, then just renegotiate her salary for the anticipated work load.

Rockie

Yes, you need to negotiate a salary for her, based on the job, not the number of hours she is working. If she is working half of what she did before, then perhaps a 50% reduction would be in order. Just depends upon what agreement can be reached between the parties.

marc

It is OK to pay attorneys a straight time hourly rate for hours worked because they are professionals.

njjel

The 21 hours isn't a "rule" it is just the MAXIMUM # of hours she said she could work during a week. However there will be many weeks when she only works 1,2,3,4, etc. hours. I say that if we keep her a salaried then we are obligated to pay her for the maximum amount of hours she agreed to work whether she works that # or not. Am I correct? thanks for the input thus far folks.

Gillian3

Sounds like this person is setting up gravy train. If some weeks she can only work 1-4 and be paid for 21, who is the beneficiary and who is being taken advantage of? Maybe you need a new employee.

njjel

Actually we do know that she is on her way out as she is moving, but we desperately need her to get us through the next couple of months. I just don't want to be paying for hours and hours of time that she didn't work and upper management doesn't either, but thinks we have to keep her as salaried b/c she's an attorney.

dchr9203

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 04-07-05 AT 01:36PM (CST)[/font][br][br] >The 21 hours isn't a "rule" it is just the
>MAXIMUM # of hours she said she could work
>during a week. However there will be many weeks
>when she only works 1,2,3,4, etc. hours. I say
>that if we keep her a salaried then we are
>obligated to pay her for the maximum amount of
>hours she agreed to work whether she works that
># or not. Am I correct? thanks for the input
>thus far folks.


Yes, you are correct on your basic question if you set her up as an "exempt" salaried employee with the understanding that her expected work week is 21 hours. FLSA does not define the # of hours, your company does.

pork1

NJJEL: I recommend you put her on an hourly rate of pay based on her "Rainmaking abilities" that might be $200.00 bucks an hour or more or less. Your concern here should be the benefit package that you might offer or not offer, because she will not be a full time regular employee. Benefits and the administration of same would be a nightmare trying to decide are we treating everyone equal? Our benefits are specific one must be a full-time employee or no benefits are provided. We define full-time as 32 hours per week or more. If you set up an hourly rate of pay and you pay O/T to anyone then she would have to also earn O/T during that strange week when she was in court and worked greater than 40 hours that week. However, that O/T situation should be controled by her supervising person.

Oh to be an attorney making those rates of pay!

Don's point is right on and you can bet it will happen if not monitored real close. There would be great room to exercising the "sand in the clock" if not closely watched by the partners. You can bet I would have a partner's written guidance as to how I am to administer this animal.

PORK

Yesterday, I was a participant in a W/C hearing and the judge failed to show. All parties to the hearing where present and they (all attorneys) kept saying lets give her a little more time, I of course, wanted to get the hearing done, so we waited until one side of the case said to the other side, (my side) "well I can stay as long as you guys can stay, you know we don't want to make the judge mad and besides ya'll (two attorneys for our side) are getting paid regardless". HA,HA With that I got out my cell phone and called to find out where our judge was. She had decided to continue the hearing and rescheduled but told none of us. The attorneys for us are paid by our carrier, but we are self insured so in fact, their cost will be charged back to the company. Once I found out or realized the attorneys were not concerned about the judge, they were marking time. I told our attorneys to wrap it up and beat it back to their home. It was a 6 hour day with lunch for them times whatever their going rate will be.

njjel

Pork - yes I have addressed the benefits issue w/the ee long ago and she has none as she does not qualify due to her number of hours.

Don D

Just a word of caution, not that you or I could have control of this; but, experienced a similar situation once where this request was made and approved. First thing we knew, she decided to 'work from home', approved, next thing you know, we never saw her and saw very little work product. I think they teach this in law school.