In a recent ruling, E.M.D. Sales, Inc. v. Carrera, the US Supreme Court held that a “preponderance of the evidence” is the appropriate legal standard to determine if an employee is exempt under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). This is compared to the standard the respondent advanced, which is the much more stringent “clear and convincing evidence” standard. This means that it may be much harder for employees to prove they should be entitled to overtime pay.
What Was This Lawsuit About?
The appellant in this case is a food importer and distributor that operates across multiple states, including Maryland. It was sued by several of its own sales representatives for failing to pay them overtime when they worked more than 40 hours per week. The company, in response, claimed that the employees were exempted from the FLSA’s overtime provisions due to falling within the “outside-salesman” exemption.
What Was the Legal Issue Being Decided?
The primary question before the Supreme Court was the legal standard to be used in determining whether its employees were considered exempt under the FLSA. The employer claimed that they should use the “preponderance of the evidence” standard, which only requires a plaintiff to prove their claim is more likely than not to be true, based on the available evidence. The employees, meanwhile, wanted to use the “clear and convincing evidence” standard, which requires significantly more intensive proof for their claim to pass muster.
What Was the Decision?
In a unanimous decision authored by Justice Kavanaugh, the Supreme Court found that the “preponderance of the evidence” standard was appropriate in this case. The rationale for this is simple: the preponderance of the evidence is the default standard used in most civil lawsuits, with the “clear and convincing evidence” standard only used in certain specific cases. The Court found that the circumstances did not call for that elevated standard, meaning that the default “preponderance” standard was appropriate.
Why Does This Matter?
This is important, because it means that employers will have a much easier time trying to prove their employees are not entitled to overtime or other FLSA protections. This may have a significant impact on their wages, as well as the legal protections available to them in the event of a dispute. However, they may still have options available to them, which is why you should contact an employment law attorney if you get into a legal dispute with your employer.
Steven Mitchell Sack, the Employee’s Lawyer, is a New York employment lawyer with more than 44 years’ experience handling the many aspects of employment law. His new book, “Fired!: Protect Your Rights & FIGHT BACK If You’re Terminated, Laid Off, Downsized, Restructured, Forced to Resign or Quit,” is available in hardback, and contains valuable advice on dealing with employment and labor law issues. To purchase the book, feel free to contact Steven Sack at 917-371-8000 or visit the website at legalstratpub.com. To inquire about a legal matter, please feel free to contact attorney Steven Sack at 917-371-8000 or stevensackatty@hotmail.com.
