New exempt salary threshold struck down: Why a judge said the feds’ rule had ‘gone seriously awry’

November 26, 2024  |  Robert J. Hingula

Editor’s note: The opinions expressed in this commentary are the author’s alone. Robert J. Hingula is employment class and collective actions co-chair at Polsinelli’s Kansas City office. He primarily focuses his practice on trial and counseling work involving labor and employment law.

This commentary was originally published by Polsinelli.

[divide]

Employers have been waiting with bated breath on the challenges to the U.S. Department of Labor’s newest salary increase for exempt employees scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2025. On Nov. 15, U.S. District Court Judge Sean Jordan for the Eastern District of Texas granted summary judgement in Texas v. Dept. of Labor — striking down the DOL’s April 2024 rule.

As a brief recap, in late April 2024, the DOL proposed two increases to the minimum salary threshold for the FLSA’s executive, administrative, and professional exemptions (known as the White Collar Exemptions). At the time of the new rule, the salary threshold was set at $684 per week, or $35,568 per year. The rule made the first increase starting July 1, 2024, of $844 per week ($43,888 annually), and the second increase starting on January 1, 2025, of $1,128 per week ($58,656 annually).

While there were several challenges before the July 1, 2024 increase, three courts that had challenges before them did not issue injunctive relief to prevent that increase from going into effect.

In his order, Judge Jordan found that the DOL’s rule exceeded its authority. Specifically, Jordan found that while the DOL can use salary as a part of its authority to define the requirements of the White Collar Exemptions, the salary test “is not included in the statutory text,” and is “not unbounded.” He stated that the salary threshold cannot “displace” the duties tests for each of the White Collar Exemptions.

In using the 2024 U.S. Supreme Court case Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo in his reasoning, Jordan examined the impact of the salary threshold increases compared to prior adjustments, specifically the latest increase in 2019. He found that the new salary increases did not just screen out those employees who were clearly non-exempt, but also resulted in disqualifying significant portions of employees who would otherwise meet the applicable duties tests. For example, the judge calculated that the July 2024 increase alone resulted in a third of prior exempt employees being disqualified from the exemption.

“When a third of otherwise exempt employees who the Department acknowledges meet the duties test are nonetheless rendered nonexempt because of an atextual proxy characteristic — the increased salary level — something has gone seriously awry.”

Jordan’s ruling completely strikes the April 2024 rule on a nationwide basis — including the increases that occurred on July 1, 2024. Thus, the salary threshold is reverted back to the $684 weekly ($35,568 annually) amount.

The DOL can appeal the decision, but with the upcoming change in presidential administration, it is uncertain what the DOL’s next step will be.

Tagged ,
Featured Business
    Featured Founder
      [adinserter block="4"]

      2024 Startups to Watch

        stats here

        Related Posts on Startland News

        The thought process behind how Niall founder Michael Wilson relinquished reins as CEO

        By Tommy Felts | May 5, 2017

        Editor’s note: Niall founder Michael Wilson recently hired a CEO to run the growing luxury watch company he founded five years ago. Here’s more on his thought process. [divide] I started Niall as a far-fetched idea five years ago while at 1810 Cherry St. in the Crossroads Arts District. Since then, I’ve faced a lot of adversity…

        Jeff Shackelford: Why would KC want to build the next Silicon Valley?

        By Tommy Felts | April 6, 2017

        Editor’s note: The opinions expressed in this commentary are the author’s alone. [divide] I recently read an article that shows you can slant a story anyway you want and that many authors write to match their preconceived notions — whether it’s true or not. The article that got me thinking about this was from Bloomberg’s Sarah…

        Gooding: Your customers don’t care about you

        By Tommy Felts | April 4, 2017

        Editor’s note: The opinions expressed in this commentary are the author’s alone. Check out more from Grant Gooding here.  It’s true. The moment you start talking about yourself is the moment you start losing.   There is no doubt that as human beings we have a natural affinity to talk about ourselves; self-promotion is hard-wired…

        Williams to critical Bloomberg piece: KC shouldn’t try to be Silicon Valley

        By Tommy Felts | March 17, 2017

        Editor’s note: The following piece is in response to a Bloomberg article critical of the Kansas City Startup Village and Kansas City’s ability to use Google Fiber to become the “next Silicon Valley.” Opinions expressed in this commentary are the author’s alone.  In 2012, Kansas City experienced what at the time must have felt like winning…