Need Quick Answer Please

njjel · September 2002

Where is it stated that employees must be paid for time they work even if the time is not approved? i.e. employee eats lunch at desk, answers the phone and puts in for the time, etc. Thanks.

Mike · September 2002

Check FLSA -- pay for all time worked

HR in PA · September 2002

Time worked=time paid. The FLSA does not stipulate between time approved and time that has not been approved. If your employee is working outside of the schedule that was set up for them without permission, it is a disciplinary issue.

njjel · September 2002

I am aware that it is in the FLSA regs, but off the top of my head don't recall the section. Can you site the section please?

Crout · September 2002

Everyone is correct. For a handy fact sheet on FLSA, go to the U.S. DOL website and search for FACT SHEET 022. Look on page 2 under "Typical Problems." The example that DOL uses has to do with an employee who sits at his/her desk while eating lunch, regularly answers the telephone and refers callers. That time must be counted and paid as compensable hours worked because the EE has not been completely relieved from duty.

Rockie · September 2002

The DOL states that employees must be paid for time they are "permitted or suffered to work". The DOL feels that if an employee is performing work, it has benefitted the company and they must be paid. What I tell new employees is if you work unapproved overtime, we have to pay you, but we CAN fire you for disciplinary reasons. When their mouths finally close, they usually have gotten the picture. Our major problem is clocking in and out for lunches. We have people who clock out, run somewhere and get their food, clock back in and go to the breakroom to eat. Our payroll person has caught many an unfortunate soul doing this. Our managers are usually pretty good about catching people who "never take lunch" If we observe these people are not losing a lot of weight, we can usually tell they are eating somewhere. There are a thousand different ways employees will try to "milk" the clock, but they are usually found out in the end. To me, this is the same as stealing money, but employees don't look at it this way. We usually given them a written disciplinary and then termination if they persist in this behavior.

moneyman · September 2002

[url]http://www.dol.gov/elaws/esa/flsa/hoursworked/screen1d.asp[/url]

This link is from the DOL e-laws site. It has "advisors" that you can work through to answer your questions. This above link shows the "suffer or permit to work" subject.

"The FLSA defines the term "employ" to include the words "suffer or permit to work". Suffer or permit to work means that if an employer requires or allows employees to work, the time spent is generally hours worked.

Thus, time spent doing work not requested by the employer, but still allowed, is generally hours worked, since the employer knows or has reason to believe that the employees are continuing to work and the employer is benefiting from the work being done. This time is commonly referred to as "working off the clock."

Also: 29 CFR 785.11
Work not requested but suffered or permitted is work time. For
example, an employee may voluntarily continue to work at the end of the
shift. He may be a pieceworker, he may desire to finish an assigned task
or he may wish to correct errors, paste work tickets, prepare time
reports or other records. The reason is immaterial. The employer knows
or has reason to believe that he is continuing to work and the time is
working time. (Handler v. Thrasher, 191, F. 2d 120 (C.A. 10, 1951);
Republican Publishing Co. v. American Newspaper Guild, 172 F. 2d 943
(C.A. 1, 1949; Kappler v. Republic Pictures Corp., 59 F. Supp. 112 (S.D.
Iowa 1945), aff'd 151 F. 2d 543 (C.A. 8, 1945); 327 U.S. 757 (1946);
Hogue v. National Automotive Parts Ass'n. 87 F. Supp. 816 (E.D. Mich.
1949); Barker v. Georgia Power & Light Co., 2 W.H. Cases 486; 5 CCH
Labor Cases, para. 61,095 (M.D. Ga. 1942); Steger v. Beard & Stone
Electric Co., Inc., 1 W.H. Cases 593; 4 Labor Cases 60,643 (N.D. Texas,
1941))
[url]http://www.dol.gov/dol/allcfr/Title_29/Part_785/29CFR785.11.htm[/url]

njjel · September 2002

One more question please.....If an employee has been instructed they may not work any extra hours and they still do so it is my understanding that we must still pay them......am I correct? (Of course discipline would follow.)

jules2001 · September 2002

correct! th-up

njjel · September 2002

Thank you all for your responses. It seems in HR at least where I work that I always need to provide written proof of these things before upper management will take action and do what the law requires.

moneyman · September 2002

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 09-11-02 AT 10:54AM (CST)[/font][p]Isn't that always the way it is. I've come across this too, if it's now down in black and white (actually in the code) they can ignore it. I have brought back many bits of information from seminars that has been "summarized" from the codes, but if I can't produce the code, its as if it doesn't exist. 8-|

njjel · September 2002

I'm glad to know I'm not alone with this type of situation. They hire us due to our expertice in the field, send us to seminars to learn about all of the HR regs and yet fail to believe us until they see it in black and white from the regs. It begins to get frustrating doesn't it?

glendolbrowder · September 2002

Thank you for posting your reply; I'm glad to know that i'm not alone; I was beginning to take their behavior as a personal insult. I spend a great deal of time researching documents to prove what I have advised is correct. Then I have to consult with "the attorney" who gives the same advise and sends a bill. After all this they usually decide to do nothing unless a serious legal problem could occur if they don't like the advise. I have been told that "we will wait to see if she/he sues before we deal with the situation.

Need Quick Answer Please

Comments