Driven by concerns about Russian online activity during the 2016 election, two senior Senate Democrats introduced new campaign finance legislationon Thursdaythat would force greater disclosure about the political advertising that runs online.
If a break is 20 minutes or less in duration, itmustbe paid. Any longer, and an employer can make it an unpaid break.
What if, however, instead of providing employees paid breaks, an employer installs a system of flex time – the employer only pays employees for the time they are logged onto its system, which maximizes employees’ ability to take breaks from work at any time, for any reason, and for any duration.
Does this flex time system of unlimited unpaid breaks pass muster under the FLSA?
According to one federalcourt of appeals, inAcosta v. American Future Systems, d/b/a Progressive Business Publications(3d Cir. 10/13/17), the answer is no.
Progressive does not deny that it permits employees to log off; it just refuses to call those time periods breaks. This misses the point of the FLSA’s regulatory scheme. Its protections cannot be negated by employers’ characterizations that deprive employees of rights they are entitled to under the FLSA. The log off times are clearly breaks to which the FLSA applies.
The policy that Progressive refers to as flexible time forces employees to choose between such basic necessities as going to the bathroom or getting paid unless the employee can sprint from computer to bathroom, relieve him or herself while there, and then sprint back to his or her computer in less than ninety seconds. If the employee can somehow manage to do that, he or she will be paid for the intervening period. If the employee requires more than ninety seconds to get to the bathroom and back, the employee will not be paid for the period logged off of, and away from, the employee’s computer. That result is absolutely contrary to the FLSA.
What is an employer’s recourse, then, to control employee abuses of paid breaks? The court had an answer forthat question as well-discipline or termination:
Progressive argues that if a bright-line rule is enforced, employees will be allowed to take any number of breaks during their workday, and as long as they are less than twenty minutes, employers will have to compensate them. We recognize this is a theoretical possibility. However, it is not a realistic one. [W]here the employee is taking multiple, unscheduled nineteen-minute breaks over and above his or her scheduled breaks for example, the employer’s recourse is to discipline or terminate the employee-not to withhold compensation.
There is little doubt that theFLSA is a tangled mess of regulationswith which even a well-intentioned employer has difficulty complying in totality. As this case illustrates, however, employers cannot game the FLSA on paid break time, as the law draws a bright-line rule on the issue.
Bravo to this employer for trying to find a creative solution to curb a problem of excessive smoke breaks, coffee breaks, and bathroom breaks. Its remedy, however, is not the installation of a system of unpaid break disguised as flex time, but instead the discipline or termination of those employees who are taking advantage of the FLSA’s generous allowance for paid break time.
Jon Hyman is a partner at Meyers, Roman, Friedberg & Lewis in Cleveland. Comment below or email email@example.com. Follow Hyman’s blog at Workforce.com/PracticalEmployer.
Wojcickisays James Damoredeserved to be fired for breathing new life into toxic stereotypes about the abilities of women.
Headed towards digital transformation? Why the right people, not technology or strategy, will make the difference between success and failure.