ARTICLE
Lehigh Valley businesses that have spent the past several months preparing for a federal rule that sought to extend the right to overtime pay to a bulk of lower-wage white-collar workers will now spend their four-day holiday weekend scrambling to figure out what to tell their employees just days before the regulation was set to take effect. That's because, in a blow to the Obama administration's labor-law plans, a federal court has blocked the start of a rule that would have made an estimated 4 million more American workers — including 185,000 in Pennsylvania — eligible for overtime pay heading into the holiday season. As a result of Tuesday's ruling, overtime changes set to take effect Dec. 1 are now unlikely before power shifts to the Donald Trump administration, which has spoken out against Obama-backed government regulation and generally aligns with the business groups that stridently opposed the overtime rule. The U.S. District Court in the Eastern District of Texas granted the nationwide preliminary injunction, saying the Department of Labor's rule exceeds the authority the agency was delegated by Congress. "Businesses and state and local governments across the country can breathe a sigh of relief now that this rule has been halted," said Nevada Attorney General Adam Laxalt, who led the coalition of 21 states and governors fighting the rule and has been a frequent critic of what he characterized as Obama administration overreach. But the last-minute injunction also puts many employers, and especially nonprofits, in a tough spot, local experts said. In anticipation of the rule, many businesses have already revised employee contracts, changed their management structures and told salaried workers they would need to be paid on an hourly basis, according to a brief written by Keely Collins, who practices employment law at King, Spry, Herman, Freund & Faul LLC in Bethlehem, and distributed by the Greater Lehigh Valley Chamber of Commerce to its members. Now, experts said, employers will need to immediately notify their workers who were slated to be affected by the rule — and those aren't easy conversations to have from a morale standpoint. "We have spent the better part of a year counseling our clients on how to deal with this, and now we're trying to counsel them in the reversal," said Edward Easterly, who practices labor and employment law at Norris McLaughlin & Marcus in Allentown. The regulation sought to shrink the so-called "white-collar exemption" that allows employers to skip overtime pay for salaried administrative or professional workers who make more than about $23,660 per year. Critics say it's wrong that some retail and restaurant chains pay low-level managers as little as $25,000 a year and no overtime — even if they work 60 hours a week. The goal of the new regulation was to prevent companies from taking advantage of salaried workers who could have been forced to work long hours for low pay. Under the rule, those workers would have been eligible for overtime pay as long as they made less than about $47,500 a year, and the threshold would adjust every three years to reflect changes in average wages. The Department of Labor said the changes would restore teeth to the Fair Labor Standards Act, which it called "the crown jewel of worker protections in the United States." Inflation weakened the act: overtime protections applied to 62 percent of U.S. full-time salaried workers in 1975 but just 7 percent today. The agency said it's now considering all its legal options. "We strongly disagree with the decision by the court, which has the effect of delaying a fair day's pay for a long day's work for millions of hardworking Americans," the Labor Department said in a statement. "The department's overtime rule is the result of a comprehensive, inclusive rulemaking process, and we remain confident in the legality of all aspects of the rule." The Department of Labor could appeal the Tuesday ruling, which might end up at a Supreme Court that includes some Trump appointees. As the rule is on hold, employers should stay up to date on information in case the regulation is put back in motion, advises Tina Hamilton, president and CEO of myHR Partner, an Upper Macungie Township human resources company. Hamilton said she received a couple emails from clients on Wednesday, wondering what they should do now that the rule has been put on hold. "In essence, it's almost worse than it was before," she said. "While we would have loved six months ago for them to say, 'Hey, we're not going to pass this bill,' that would have been fabulous. But once you start giving all these pay increases and changing people around and readjusting the entire business, what are you supposed to do?" Well, there's a couple options, Hamilton and other experts said. Before the reversal, many employers had already met with their workers and explained what the rule means for them. Now, they can either decide to move forward with their plans based on the theory the rule will eventually go into effect, scrap their plan completely or wait to see what will happen, said Kathleen Mills, an attorney specializing in employment law at Fitzpatrick Lentz & Bubba in Center Valley. In any of those cases, the key is communicating honestly and effectively with employees about the injunction and what it means for them, experts said. But that can be an awkward situation for an employer and a deflating one for an employee who may have been in line for a pay increase under the new rule. As for employers who implemented the changes ahead of Dec. 1, that's an even tougher predicament, Mills said. "What a pleasant Thanksgiving for all the employers who now have to sit down and figure out where they're going to go," Mills said. Read the original article here.