Wage & Hour

Subscribe to Wage & Hour via RSS
Business people measuring temperature in the office

On October 30, 2025, the Nevada Supreme Court issued an important decision in Amazon.com Services, LLC v. Malloy when it concluded that Nevada’s wage and hour laws do not incorporate the federal Portal-to-Portal Act of 1947 (PPA). 29 U.S.C. §§ 251–62. This decision adds a layer of complexity to employers’ continued attempts to comply with myriad differences in federal and state wage and hour laws across the country.Continue Reading Nevada Supreme Court Holds That State Wage and Hour Laws Do Not Incorporate the Federal Portal-to-Portal Act

On September 15, 2025, the Colorado Supreme Court issued a highly anticipated ruling in By the Rockies v. Perez, clarifying that the statute of limitations for claims under the state’s Minimum Wage Act is two years, or three years for a willful violation. This employer-friendly ruling reversed a Colorado Court of Appeals decision holding that plaintiffs have six years to bring such a claim.Continue Reading Colorado Supreme Court Shortens the Statute of Limitations for Colorado Minimum Wage Act Claims  

As we discussed here, on July 4, 2025, President Donald Trump signed the “One Big Beautiful Bill” Act (OBBBA) into law, which included a provision establishing a new temporary above-the-line tax deduction for “qualified tip income” through at least the 2028 tax year. When we previously discussed the deduction for qualified tip income, the IRS had not yet published its list of individuals who are eligible for the deduction—i.e., anyone who is “in an occupation which customarily and regularly receive[s] tips.”

We now have that guidance.Continue Reading Treasury Department Issues List of Jobs Qualifying for New Tip Income Deduction Under “One Big Beautiful Bill” Act

Civil Rights Act of 1964 Title VII written in business textbook

In Bivens v. Zep, Inc., No. 24-2109 (6th Cir. Aug. 8, 2025), the Sixth Circuit split with the EEOC and most U.S. Courts of Appeals as to when an employer may be liable under Title VII for harassment by a non-agent (e.g., non-employees such as an employer’s customers or clients). The court rejected the prevalent negligence standard and instead held that a plaintiff must show that an employer “intended” for the harassment by the non-employee to occur.Continue Reading Sixth Circuit Splits with EEOC and Other Circuits as to Employer Liability for Harassment by Non-Employees Under Title VII

On July 1, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit joined the majority of federal appellate courts holding that courts must establish personal jurisdiction over the claims of each member of a collective action under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).Continue Reading Ninth Circuit Weighs In On Circuit Split Involving FLSA Collective Action Jurisdictional Requirements

On June 2, 2025, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) announced the relaunching and expansion of its opinion letter program (Program). The Program is designed to help the public understand their compliance obligations through opinion letters, which are formal, written guidance on how a DOL enforcement agency would apply federal labor law in a specific workplace situation. These letters can be requested by anyone and address various workplace scenarios, such as how to apply existing law to novel or ambiguous legal issues.Continue Reading U.S. Department of Labor Announces Relaunch & Expansion of Its Opinion Letter Program

On May 1, 2025, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) published FAB No. 2025-1, providing guidance to its field staff on the analysis to apply when determining whether a worker is an independent contractor or employee for purposes of Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) enforcement.

The independent contractor vs. employee analysis under the FLSA has fluctuated for more than a decade. The applicable analysis has always revolved around the economic realities test, but the focus of the test has shifted.Continue Reading U.S. Department of Labor Issues New FLSA Independent Contractor Guidance

On April 1, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit issued an important decision in Pickens v. Hamilton-Ryker IT Solutions, LLC regarding what it means to be paid on a “weekly basis” for purposes of the salary-basis test, a key factor in determining whether an employee is properly classified as “exempt” from the Fair Labor Standards Act’s (FLSA) overtime requirements.Continue Reading Sixth Circuit Clarifies Requirements for a Salaried Employee to Be “Paid on a Weekly Basis” Under the FLSA.

On March 17, 2025, the New Jersey Supreme Court unanimously held in Musker v. Suuchi that commissions are included in the definition of “wages” under New Jersey’s Wage Payment Law (“WPL”).  Wages under the WPL are defined as “direct monetary compensation for labor or services rendered by an employee, where the amount is determined on a time, task, piece or commission basis.”  The trial and appellate courts held that commissions were a “supplementary incentive,” which is excluded from the definition of wages under the WPL. Supplementary incentives were described by the court as additional “compensation that motivates employees to do something above and beyond their labor or services.”Continue Reading The New Jersey Supreme Court Finds that Commissions Are Wages Under the New Jersey Wage Payment Law

On February 12, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon issued an important decision in Porteous v. Flowers Foods, Inc. regarding the enforceability of class and collective action waivers contained in otherwise unenforceable arbitration agreements.Continue Reading Federal District Court Says Class and Collective Action Waiver Survives Unenforceable Arbitration Agreement