Employer Blurring Lines of Exempt and Non-Exempt
My question involves employment and labor law for the state of: Massachusetts
I am an exempt employee working 40 hrs. week. in an outpatient office that is part of a larger hospital. I am required to punch in, but not punch out. Thus, there is no record of my actual hours worked. There are weeks that I work overtime and I do not receive any compensation or credit time for that. On the days that my work is finished, there are no patients to see, or our office closes due to inclement weather, I cannot leave early unless I use ETO.
Additionally, if you do not have any ETO to use, we were told that we would not be paid for missed hours from a partial day of work (even in the case of leaving early due to inclement weather.) We were also told that we could not make up missed hours by working more hours the following week.
Our pay is treated as hourly in this regard, but we are told we are salaried/exempt otherwise. It just seems like our employer is trying to have it both ways. What can we expect for exempt employee rights in this situation?
Re: Employer Blurring Lines of Exempt and Non-Exempt
I will take you at your word that you are correctly classified as exempt. However, keep in mind that not all salaried employees are exempt, and not all exempt employees are salaried.
There are NO circumstances whatsoever in which an exempt employee is entitled under the law to overtime, even if they work 168 hours a week. An employer may, if he chooses, provide an exempt employee with comp time; he is not required to under the law.
The law is completely indifferent to whether an exempt employee is required to clock in, clock out, both, or neither. It does not in any way affect the exempt status and there are some very valid reasons to require it. It is also not necessary if the employer doesn't want it. If the employer wants you to clock in but doesn't care if you clock out, then that's the way it is. There is NO requirement that the employer keep track of an exempt employee's hours. There is also no prohibition blocking him from doing so. It's his choice.
It is 100% legal in every state except California, and it is legal in California in most circumstances, to require an exempt employee to use vacation, PTO, ETO, or other paid leave, for instances when the business closes early (regardless of reason) or the employee leaves early.
However, the one point on which your employer appears to be in violation of the law would be if an exempt employee worked a partial day, did not have any vacation or paid leave, and was not paid for the unworked portion of the day. The ONLY instances in which an exempt employee can be docked PAY (he can legally be docked paid leave) for a partial day's work is if the time is attributable to FMLA, or if it is the first or last week of employment.
If an exempt employee's pay (NOT his leave time - docking leave time is absolutely legal) is docked for a partial day's absence, he can file a complaint with the state AG's office (which functions as the DOL in MA). Otherwise, the issues you've raised are not a matter of the employer blurring the lines, but are simply a function of being exempt.
http://www.mass.gov/ago/doing-busine...wage-and-hour/