Not a funny/personal dilemma

System

Sorry to put this on the har-har, but I've got what looks like a conflict of interest issue that I need some advice on.
My Boyfreind (I hate that term) is the I.S. manager of my company. Yes, we did meet on the job and kept it secret for about a year. It has been three years now and everything is out in the open and there has been no problems.
Recently my finance manager asked me to research whether or not my BF's two employees could qualify for exempt status. One is a programmer and one is a data entry clerk. Well I told right off that I did'nt think so but that I would talk to my legal counsel and double check.
Counsel responded that data entry clerk definitely not but programmer could if paid an amount that was way over what my BF earns.I forwarded this to the finance manager.
My BF can do what the programmer does but invests most of his time in the management of the network. So then I got to thinking. My BF supervises people so that should qualify him for exempt. But as I understand it, exempt and non-exempt status is a different story in computerland, so I started wondering should, I'll call him J, be getting paid more? And now that the FM Knows that I researched the first thing does he think I'll research this?(duh)
Knowing this, will this hinder any chance he will have to ask for a raise? He was planning on doing so. I have not told him any of this.
Am I totally paranoid?

Don D

I don't have enough information to know if you're paranoid. But, you are experiencing the perfect example of why workplace romances cause, we'll call them........opportunities. You have no dilemma at all, however, as your mission now is to recall your role as an HR professional, say nothing to your boyfriend about this subject, separate your personal and work roles and try really hard to find something else to discuss with him this weekend.

System

You are absolutely right Don D. The problem is that I think that quite a number of ee's are being put as exempt when they don't qualify. I am also worried for the Co.'s sake that we are not paying these people overtime and haven't for years.
I'll start talking politics, that'll get him running.

Brad Forrister

Strikes me that you have several issues here. The real conflict I see is getting involved in the question of whether he should get a raise. But even there, I don't think it's a giant conflict if you're not the decisionmaker. You're just providing information to the finance manager.

That information, even on the question of the two subordinates, should probably have included an evaluation of J's exempt status. First, if he supervises two people, shouldn't he be exempt? Second, if you're talking about the potential exempt status of his direct reports, shouldn't he be exempt? Could you/should you ever have a non-exempt person supervising exempt persons?

Also, your findings on the exempt status of his direct reports raises, at least indirectly, the age-old question of the advisability of having someone supervise an employee who's making more money than he or she is.

Whether he should be exempt and whether he should get a raise are two very different and not too related questions. I'd say you should advise the finance manager on the former even if you don't feel you should advise on the latter.

Brad Forrister
Director of Publishing
M. Lee Smith Publishers

Don D

Brad! No more caffein this afternoon!

HS

Regardless of who 'your boyfriend' is, if a person is supervising other individuals, they should rightly be classified as exempt. Put in your recommendation as the HR professional that you are and leave it at that. DO NOT say anything to your 'boyfriend' about your recommendations.