Trip Paid but Wages Not?

HRCalico

I'm trying to make some heads or tails of this one . . .

Non-exempt employee put in for two days vacation. In casual conversation, I asked if he was doing something fun. He said he's being sent to California to tour a plant that manufactures machinery we use - our company is paying for the ticket.

After speaking to his supervisor, I learned this is more of a "marketing" trip. The supervisor was initially invited, but opted to not go because there isn't much benefit to our company from this trip.

Supervisor and president decided to offer the trip to employee, with the condition that we would pay for the ticket if employee would use vacation time. I asked the supervisor (exempt) if he would be paid for his time if he went, and he said no.

I guess I see their point on this, but I wondered what the forum would say. Could this be considered a one-time benefit or perq sort of thing? And if so, does that open up another can of worms that I haven't though of? x:-/

Happy Monday, all.

SMace

He needs to be paid. Here is a snippet from NE Wage and Hour law:

Training Time. Generally, attendance at courses, lectures, meetings, training programs, and similar activities does not constitute hours worked if ALL FOUR of the following conditions are met:

· Attendance is outside normal working hours.

· Attendance is voluntary. The employee has not been led to believe that his or her present working conditions or the continuance of employment would be adversely affected by nonattendance.

· The course, lecture, meeting, or training is not directly related to the employee’s current job assignment, that is, it is not intended to improve the employee’s performance in the current job.

· The employee performs no work of value for the employer during the course or meeting or training period.

Don D

It sounds to me as if the only benefit of the trip is for the company. The employee has the perception that he is 'being sent'. He gains nothing personally. It's not a vacation. If nothing else, its a PR event for the benefit of the company. He should be paid. The exempt supervisor was not being honest when he said he would not be paid if he went.

HRinFL

I think you are okay since it appears that everyone is viewing this as something the company is not sponsoring. I do not believe that you would have to pay wages, but I would want something in writing from the ee that this is not a company sponsored event and that this is not something that is within his or her terms of employment.

The only thing I see is that with the comapny paying for the tickets, the ee will probably have to pay the taxes on the tickets, etiher as part of wages (which I would not recommend since it is not a sponsored event) or as a miscellaneous perk tax. I am not sure about this, since the ee is not exempt. It will probably not be much, but I would check and see if this is applicable and let the ee know if they are going to be taxed and for what amount.

System

At any given moment, a nonexempt is either on the clock or off. On the clock, you can require him to tour a factory but you have to pay him for it (in dollars, not plane tickets).

If he's off the clock, then he's free to do whatever he wants in California. And the DOL will never believe that touring a factory is his idea of a fun vacation.

James Sokolowski
HRhero.com

Parabeaglex2

And the DOL
>will never believe that touring a factory is his
>idea of a fun vacation.

Not a fun vacation? Obviously, Comrade James, you never talked with the peace-loving peoples of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics - they loved touring factories, farms, collectives x;-)