But the impact of the “statement of basis” — a document expressing the IWC’s view of the law — may do little to clarify just what companies should be doing in respect to complying with state overtime statutes. While some employment defense attorneys hailed Monday’s statement as a victory, others contend that the action by the IWC was nothing short of illegal.

On Monday, the panel said 4-1 that a May interpretation of the eight-hour work day statute by Miles Locker, the former head of the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement, was wrong to say that an employee’s exempt status is based on a monthly test.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]