On
In their capacity as business development managers, the employees built relationships and developed leads, which required creative thinking and tailoring to each corporate client. While they developed opportunities between clients and dealerships, the business development managers did not have the final authority to quote prices or close deals themselves.
In deciding that the business development managers were exempt from the FLSA and subject to the administrative exemption, the district court found the exemption applied because: (1) the employees' compensation met or exceeded the
On appeal, the employees did not dispute that their salaries exceeded the requisite minimum or that they performed office or non-manual work directly related to the employer's customers. Rather, they argued they did not exercise discretion and independent judgment with respect to matters of significance because their work was too repetitive to allow for meaningful discretion. They also tried to draw what the Eleventh Circuit described as a "strained distinction" by arguing that though they used discretion with respect to matters that impacted or affected matters of significance, they did not directly exercise discretion with respect to matters of significance.
In rejecting the employees' argument, the Eleventh Circuit noted that the "discretion exercised by the business development managers goes straight to the heart" of
Takeaways
While the Eleventh Circuit held that the business development managers in this case were exempt from the FLSA's overtime provision, it is important for employers to understand that the applicability of an FLSA exemption is not based on job titles, but, rather, on job functions. Accordingly, employers should consider conducting a detailed case-by-case analysis of job functions prior to classifying an employee as FLSA exempt. This is particularly true considering the potential consequences of misclassification, including double damages and attorneys' fees. Thus, employers should work closely with their employment counsel to determine whether a particular employee exercises the requisite discretion on matters of significance and otherwise meets the requirements of an FLSA exemption.
Footnotes
1 Brown v. Nexus Bus. Sols., LLC, No. 20-13909, 2022 WL 982860 (11th Cir.
2 Brown v. Nexus Bus. Sols., LLC, 488 F. Supp. 3d 1287 (N.D. Ga. 2020).
3 The FLSA requires an employer to pay its employees at a rate not less than 1.5 times the regular rate of pay for any hours exceeding 40 in a workweek. 29 U.S.C. § 207(a)(1).
4 29 U.S.C. § 213(a)(1).
5 Under the
6 29 C.F.R. § 541.202(c).
7 29 C.F.R. § 541.202(a).
8 29 C.F.R. § 541.202(e).
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
Mr
Littler Mendelson
20th Floor
California
CA 94108-2693
Tel: 213443-4245
Fax: 213443-4299
E-mail: JKlein@littler.com
URL: www.littler.com
© Mondaq Ltd, 2022 - Tel. +44 (0)20 8544 8300 - http://www.mondaq.com, source