Out Of Sight, Out Of Mind: Why DOL Opinion Letter FLSA2026-10 Is A Wake-Up Call For Managing Remote And Mobile Workers

Introduction: Recently, the U.S. Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division (DOL) issued Opinion Letter FLSA2026-10, which addresses whether a field service engineer must be paid for time spent receiving employer-dispatched pages, calling clients to schedule service appointments, and driving from home to the first client location.

Generally, employers are not required to pay for ordinary commuting time or for minor, incidental activities performed before or after an employee’s principal job duties. Also, simply because an employee uses a company-provided vehicle for a commute and handles routine tasks from that vehicle does not automatically make that time compensable.

FLSA2026-10 illustrates how these existing principles apply in practice. It highlights the dividing line between passively receiving dispatch messages and actively scheduling client appointments and explains how substantive pre-shift work can convert an otherwise noncompensable commute into paid hours worked.

FLSA2026-10

Receiving Pages: Not Compensable

DOL concluded that passively receiving pages through an employer’s internal messaging system before performing any other work-related activities is likely not compensable work time. DOL reasoned that accepting a page (which, in this case, took approximately 15 seconds) is incidental to the employee’s use of a company vehicle for commuting, a category of activity the law specifically excludes from compensability. Receiving an electronic dispatch is the kind of brief, passive step that naturally accompanies driving a company vehicle to job sites, and it does not rise to the level of substantive work. This conclusion is consistent with federal court decisions holding that simply receiving assignments or checking a schedule is not integral and indispensable to the employee’s core job duties.

Scheduling Calls: Compensable

Conversely, DOL determined that time spent calling clients to set up service appointments and coordinating with other engineers to cover or assist with requests is compensable hours worked. Unlike passive paging, these calls are not incidental to a commute. Rather, DOL found these scheduling and coordination duties to be “integral and indispensable” to the employee’s principal activities, such as installing and servicing equipment at client locations. Because these calls are required by the employer, directly benefit the business, and are necessary to fulfill client service requests, they trigger the start of the workday.

Commuting Time: Usually Not, But Can Become, Compensable

In the opinion letter, DOL also explained how compensable scheduling calls can turn an otherwise noncompensable commute into paid work time. The continuous workday rule provides that once an employee begins a principal activity, time generally remains compensable until the employee finishes the last principal activity of the day. The opinion letter distinguishes between two scenarios.

In the first scenario, the employee completes all scheduling calls at home before leaving for the first client site. Because principal activities have already begun, the subsequent drive occurs within the continuous workday, making the full drive compensable.

In the second scenario, the employee begins driving before making any calls and starts scheduling clients mid-commute. There, the travel before the first call remains ordinary, noncompensable commuting, but all travel from the first scheduling call forward is compensable.

Importantly, DOL emphasized that this analysis is fact-specific and depends on the employee spending the substantial majority of the pre-shift hour on calls. A less extensive amount of calling during a commute may result in a different outcome, though the actual time spent on calls would still be compensable.

Practical Impact

FLSA2026-10 has immediate practical significance, not only for employers of field service engineers, but also for companies that employ cable and telecom installers, home-health workers, equipment repair technicians, and other mobile personnel who coordinate their schedules before arriving at a first job site. Employers in these industries should consider the following steps.

1. Audit whether field employees perform substantive pre-shift work, such as scheduling calls, client outreach, or crew coordination, as opposed to merely accepting dispatched assignments. The distinction determines compensability.
2. Update timekeeping systems so employees can accurately record pre-shift calls and the time when compensable commuting begins.
3. Review employer-vehicle and travel-time policies to define when the workday starts for mobile employees.
4. Where at-home work time is genuinely difficult to measure, consider entering into a reasonable written agreement with employees for calculating hard-to-track hours, provided the agreement reflects all pertinent facts.
5. Train supervisors and dispatchers not to require off-the-clock scheduling or coordination work before the employee’s recorded shift begins, because the employer’s knowledge of such work creates an obligation for employers to pay employees for that time.

The Bottom Line

Most employers are generally well-versed in tracking time and managing wage-hour compliance for staff operating out of a central office or worksite. However, FLSA2026-10 reminds employers that they must pay the same rigorous attention to remote and mobile workers.

When employees operate outside the traditional four walls of a business, the risk of an uncompensated wage claim is amplified. Because these workers are out of sight, it is easy for early-morning administrative tasks, such as scheduling appointments or handling client calls, to slip past standard timekeeping practices. If left unmonitored, these seemingly minor duties can inadvertently trigger the start of a paid shift, transforming an ordinary commute or pre-work routine into expensive hours worked.

The stakes are particularly high for employers with large field teams. An individually small but widespread error misclassifying compensable travel time as an ordinary noncompensable commute can create substantial exposure and open the door to costly class and collective actions.

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.