ARTICLE
16 October 2024

Supreme Court Set To Determine Burden Of Proof On Fair Labor Standards Act Exemptions

FL
Foley & Lardner

Contributor

Foley & Lardner LLP looks beyond the law to focus on the constantly evolving demands facing our clients and their industries. With over 1,100 lawyers in 24 offices across the United States, Mexico, Europe and Asia, Foley approaches client service by first understanding our clients’ priorities, objectives and challenges. We work hard to understand our clients’ issues and forge long-term relationships with them to help achieve successful outcomes and solve their legal issues through practical business advice and cutting-edge legal insight. Our clients view us as trusted business advisors because we understand that great legal service is only valuable if it is relevant, practical and beneficial to their businesses.
The U.S. Supreme Court has set oral argument for November 5, 2024, in E.M.D. Sales, Inc. v. Carrera.
United States Employment and HR

The U.S. Supreme Court has set oral argument for November 5, 2024, in E.M.D. Sales, Inc. v. Carrera.

The issue before the court is what standard of proof employers must satisfy to demonstrate that a Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) exemption to its overtime and minimum wage requirements applies. Specifically, the court will resolve whether the standard is a "preponderance of the evidence" or "clear and convincing evidence."

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit adopted the more stringent "clear and convincing evidence" standard. However, most courts in other federal circuits apply the less exacting "preponderance of the evidence" standard. To demonstrate "clear and convincing" evidence, an employer must show that there is a high probably or high likelihood of the exemption applying. While not as high of a bar as the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard used in criminal cases, the Fourth Circuit's approach involves a much higher burden than showing it is more likely than not (the "preponderance of the evidence" standard).

Notably, in Encino Motorcars, LLC v. Navarro, 584 U.S. 79 (2018), the Supreme Court recently rejected the Fourth Circuit's determination that exemptions under the FLSA should be narrowly construed and determined they should be given their ordinary meaning. It is not clear whether that ruling will impact the court's decision on the burden of proof required.

Several interested third parties have filed amicus briefs before the Supreme Court in this matter, including the Washington Legal Foundation and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. As a reminder, the burden of proving an exemption falls on the employer claiming that exemption.

The outcome of this Supreme Court case will have significant practical effect in that it will determine how much evidence an employer must provide to prove an exemption. Given the number of FLSA collective actions filed each year, this case has broad implications for employers in both deciding whether to classify an employee as exemption and in its legal strategy when defending FLSA misclassification claims.

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.

See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More