As reported in various media outlets, the New York Attorney General’s office recently sent a request to several retail employers who do business in New York for information concerning their practices of scheduling employees for “on-call” shifts.

Some retailers utilize on-call shift scheduling in order to ensure flexibility and control labor costs.  Indeed, it is

A recent Seventh Circuit decision  may provide ammunition for employers defending FLSA claims brought by commission-based employees or employees who work irregular hours.

In Ramon Alvarado, et al. v. Corporate Cleaning Services, Inc., et al., No. 13-3818 (7th Cir. April 1, 2015),  the plaintiffs were 24 window washers employed currently or formerly by Corporate Cleaning Services (“CCS”), one of Chicago’s largest providers of window-washing services to high-rises. They filed a lawsuit against CCS for failure to pay overtime wages under the FLSA, alleging they worked in excess of 40 hours in individual work weeks for CCS but were not paid at a rate of one and a half times their regular hourly rate of pay for all the time they worked in excess of 40 hours per week.

There is a commission-related exception to the FLSA that requires satisfaction of three conditions: (i) the worker’s regular pay exceeds one and a half times the federal minimum wage; (ii) more than half of the worker’s compensation represents commissions on goods or services; and (iii) the worker must be employed by a retail or service establishment.  See 29 U.S.C. § 207(i).  CCS  conceded that it did not pay the window washers for work in excess of 40 hours a week; and the window washers conceded that their regular pay exceeds one and a half times the federal minimum wage (under the exception’s first required condition).

Examining the “commission” issue, Circuit Judge Richard Posner  reviewed certain facts, including CCS’s assignment of “points” to jobs based on complexity and the number of hours that the window washers took to complete the job, as well as how each worker usually received the same amount of points allocated to the job.  CCS then used the number of points assigned to the job to determine the amount it charged the customer and often made price adjustments for the costs of permits, equipment rentals, competition, or the desire to maintain good relations with customers.  Because the plaintiffs’ compensation was based on the points assigned to each job on which they worked, their compensation would vary from job to job.

Posner analyzed the differences between two compensation systems – commission based and piecework based compensation.   In a piece-rate system the worker is paid by the item produced by him; but in a commission system, a worker is paid by the sale.  Varying compensation does not invalidate the compensation system as a commission system.  See Yi v. Sterling Collision Centers, Inc., 480 F.3d 505, 509-10 (7th Cir. 2007).  Another important consideration is that commission-compensated work involves irregular hours of work.  See Id. at 510.  Furthermore, if sales are made at a uniform rate, so that the hours worked-to-pay ratio is constant, then an employee who is paid by the sale is not a commission worker.  Piece-rate workers are not within the FLSA commission exception because they keep producing even when no sale is imminent – the hours-to-output tend to be constant.

Here, however, the plaintiffs could only work when CCS was hired (or sold its services), and therefore, their employment was irregular because of the peculiar conditions of the window-washing business.  In addition, Posner listed other reasons why their work was irregular, such as: weather, unable to amass an inventory, delays due to other work being done on the buildings or failure to notify residents, slowdown in demand, and, oddly enough, peregrine falcon attacks.  Posner concluded that the plaintiffs’ compensation represented commission because they were paid only if there had been a sale of window washing services.
Continue Reading The Seventh Circuit Further Clarifies FLSA Overtime Exceptions…For Window Washers

Following on the increase in wage class actions, this week brings us a hefty settlement for shoe retailer, Payless Shoesource Inc.  Last March, former Payless store managers filed suit in Connecticut federal court, accusing the company of misclassifying them as exempt and failing to pay them overtime.  The original case was then combined with a

The employee notice requirements of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”) at times seem like form over substance – but recent litigation underscores that, well, filling out the forms really does matter.

The craft supply retailer Michaels Stores, Inc. was sued with a proposed class action in January alleging that the company’s background check notices

No bargaining unit too small? Certainly not for the National Labor Relations Board.

Earlier this month, the NLRB rejected Macy’s argument that a cosmetics bargaining unit was too narrow and ordered the retailer to bargain with the unit.  Macy’s had tried to argue that an entire store bargaining unit was more appropriate and that the

Anyone who follows the employment litigation docket knows that lawsuits by unpaid (and often, subsequently unemployed) interns have turned into the claim-du-jour in many parts of the country.  Following the recent onset of wage class actions brought by former interns against fashion and media industry powerhouses, last week Burberry became the latest luxury retailer victim. 

Model Walking Down Runway
From Flickr Creative Commons Cuba Gallery

Blog co-editors Barbara Hoey and Mark Konkel will be speaking at IN FASHION, Kelley Drye’s Fashion & Retail Law Summit, on January 22nd. The event, taking place at the Affinia Manhattan, will feature discussion on the latest legal and regulatory issues facing executives