In E.M.D. Sales, Inc. v. Cabrera, the Supreme Court unanimously held that a preponderance of the evidence standard applies when an employer must demonstrate that its employees were correctly classified as exempt from the minimum-wage and overtime-pay requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”). That's good news for employers and bad news for the group of sales representative employees who brought the suit seeking large sums of overtime pay, arguing that the more onerous clear and convincing evidence standard applied.
Rejecting the employees' “policy-laden arguments” for the heightened standard of proof, the Supreme Court observed that “the public interest in Fair Labor Standards Act cases does not fall entirely on the side of employees.” “Rather than choose sides in a policy debate,” the Court reasoned that the preponderance standard, the default in civil litigation, applied because: (1) the FLSA did not specify a standard of proof for exemptions; (2) the case did not implicate any constitutional rights that might require a heightened standard; and (3) the case did not involve the government taking “unusual coercive action” against an individual. The Court has now paved the way for a consistent and less burdensome standard for demonstrating that an employee is exempt under the FLSA, which will be particularly helpful to employers facing overtime pay litigation.
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.