Business Groups Challenge
Business Groups Challenge Overtime Rule . Led by Texas, 21 states filed a lawsuit Sept. 20 challenging the Department of Labor's (DOL's) overtime rule revisions. Also filed on the same day, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, National Federation of Independent Business, National Retail Federation and other business groups brought their own separate legal challenge of the overtime rule.
But businesses should continue to prepare for the overtime rule as though there were no legal challenges. The rule as of now is still set to take effect Dec. 1.
Moreover, some experts think that the legal challenges of the rule are far from certain to succeed.
"It would be reckless for employers to assume that the new rule will be enjoined before Dec. 1," said Robert Boonin, an attorney with Dykema in Detroit and Ann Arbor, Mich. "While we can hope for such an outcome, until that actually happens, they should continue on the course of complying with the new rule."
Business Groups Speak Out
Like the states' lawsuit, the business groups' complaint challenged the automatic triennial increase in the salary threshold. The business groups also filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, which Jeff Ruzal, an attorney with Epstein Becker Green in New York City, described as a "rocket docket"—one that will issue a decision quickly.
Lawsuits Might Fail
Some experts predicted the overtime rule would be challenged in the courts as soon as it was issued. But not everyone agrees that the DOL exceeded its authority in enacting the regulations.
"The DOL fulfilled all of their obligations during the rulemaking proceeding," said Lawrence Mishel, Ph.D., economist and the president of the Economic Policy Institute, a nonpartisan, Washington, D.C., think tank. "They crossed every t and dotted every i. The final overtime pay rule update should be implemented as planned starting Dec. 1."
While U.S. Rep. Kurt Schrader is seeking to do away with the automatic triennial increases in a blue-dog Democrat bill with growing bipartisan support, Mishel said, "Indexing is the most important part of the rule update because it is the lack of indexing that caused overtime pay to be eroded." He cited an Economic Policy Institute report that stated, "Failure to adequately update the salary threshold over 1975-2015 caused the share of the salaried workforce that was guaranteed overtime pay to fall from 49.6 percent to just 9.5 percent in 2015."
Jim Swartz, an attorney with Polsinelli in Atlanta, noted that in the states' lawsuit, "The court is likely to view with skepticism the plaintiff's argument that the agency's regulatory modifications—upwardly adjusting the amount of the salary—is beyond the agency's congressionally authorized authority or an arbitrary and capricious interpretation of the law."
However, DeCamp said, "The argument against automatic increases seems quite strong. A change in the minimum salary required for exempt status is a substantive change to the exemption, and generally under the Administrative Procedure Act substantive changes to regulations must go through full notice-and-comment rulemaking."
Alfred Robinson Jr., an attorney at Ogletree Deakins in Washington, D.C., and former acting administrator of the Wage and Hour Division, agreed. "The FLSA does not say that these definitions can be put on automatic pilot without regard to articulating some reason or basis for revising the definitions," he stated.