29 C.F.R. § 531.36

Nonovertime workweeks

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) When no overtime is worked by the employees, section 3(m) and this part apply only to the applicable minimum wage for all hours worked. To illustrate, where an employee works 40 hours a week at a cash wage rate of at least the applicable minimum wage and is paid that amount free and clear at the end of the workweek, and in addition is furnished facilities, no consideration need be given to the question of whether such facilities meet the requirements of section 3(m) and this part, since the employee has received in cash the applicable minimum wage for all hours worked. Similarly, where an employee is employed at a rate in excess of the applicable minimum wage and during a particular workweek works 40 hours for which the employee receives at least the minimum wage free and clear, the employer having deducted from wages for facilities furnished, whether such deduction meets the requirement of section 3(m) and subpart B of this part need not be considered, since the employee is still receiving, after the deduction has been made, a cash wage of at least the minimum wage for each hour worked. Deductions for board, lodging, or other facilities may be made in nonovertime workweeks even if they reduce the cash wage below the minimum wage, provided the prices charged do not exceed the “reasonable cost” of such facilities. When such items are furnished the employee at a profit, the deductions from wages in weeks in which no overtime is worked are considered to be illegal only to the extent that the profit reduces the wage (which includes the “reasonable cost” of the facilities) below the required minimum wage. Facilities must be measured by the requirements of section 3(m) and this part to determine if the employee has received the applicable minimum wage in cash or in facilities which may be legitimately included in “wages” payable under the Act.

(b) Deductions for articles such as tools, miners' lamps, dynamite caps, and other items which do not constitute “board, lodging, or other facilities” may likewise be made in nonovertime workweeks if the employee nevertheless received the required minimum wage in cash free and clear; but to the extent that they reduce the wages of the employee in any such workweek below the minimum required by the Act, they are illegal.

[32 FR 13575, Sept. 28, 1967, as amended at 76 FR 18855, Apr. 5, 2011]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 18 cases (9 in the last 5 years), 2002–2025 · leading case: Castellanos-Contreras v. Decatur Hotels, LLC, 622 F.3d 393 (5th Cir. 2010).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Castellanos-Contreras v. Decatur Hotels, LLC, 622 F.3d 393 (5th Cir. 2010). · cites it 2× “See generally 29 C.F.R. § 531.36 (2010); see also Arriaga v.”

Garcia v. Frog Island Seafood, Inc., 644 F. Supp. 2d 696 (E.D.N.C. 2009). · cites it 2× “See 29 C.F.R. § 531.36 (b). Moreover, an employer cannot avoid this rule “by simply requiring employees to make such purchases on their own, either in advance of or during the employment.”

Victor Rivera v. Peri & Sons Farms, Inc., 735 F.3d 892 (9th Cir. 2013). “See 29 C.F.R. § 531.36 (applying the rule to “any such workweek”).”

Jorge E. Arriaga v. Florida Pac. Farms, L.L.C., 305 F.3d 1228 (11th Cir. 2002). “See 29 C.F.R. § 531.36 (b). This rule cannot be avoided by simply requiring employees to make such pin-chases on their own, either in advance of or during the employment.”

Teoba v. Trugreen Landcare LLC, 769 F. Supp. 2d 175 (W.D.N.Y. 2011). “See 29 C.F.R. § 531.36 (b). This rule cannot be avoided by simply requiring employees to make such purchases on their own, either in advance of or during the employment.”

Diaz v. Silver Bay Logging, Inc., 55 P.3d 732 (Alaska 2002). “29 C.F.R. § 531.36 (a) (2002). Since we interpret subsection (d) of 8 AAC 15.”

Sao v. Pro-Tech Prods. Inc. (D. Ariz. 2019). · cites it 2× “” 3 Martinez, 2019 WL 450870 , at *3 (citing 29 C.F.R. § 531.36 (b))6. 4 In Martinez, the plaintiff sued after receiving a paycheck for $0 following 5 termination of his employment.”

Nail v. Shipp (S.D. Ala. 2019). “See 29 C.F.R. § 531.36 (b). This rule cannot be avoided by simply requiring employees to make such purchases on their own, either in advance of or during the employment.”

Boyd v. SFS Commc'ns, LLC (D. Maryland 2021). “” 29 C.F.R. § 531.36 . Moreover, under the MWPCL, during any workweek, an employer may only make deductions to an employee’s wages to the extent they are “authorized expressly in writing by the employee” or “otherwise made in accordance” with the law.”

Lilley v. IOC-Kansas City, Inc. DO NOT FILE IN THIS CASE- Case Consol. with case No. 19-cv-4084-NKL. All filings should be docketed in Lead Case 19-cv-4084-NKL. (W.D. Mo. 2019). “2002) (citing 29 C.F.R. § 531.36 (b)). “When evaluating expenses that are directly or indirectly related to employment, the examples in § 531.”

DeMoss v. Perry's Restaurants LTD (W.D. Tex. 2023). “2002) (citing 29 C.F.R. § 531.36 (b)). Whether expenses qualify as “primarily for the benefit of the employer” turns on “whether the employment- related cost is a personal expense that would arise as a normal living expense.”

Keefe v. Perry's Restaurants LTD (W.D. Tex. 2023). “2002) (citing 29 C.F.R. § 531.36 (b)). Whether expenses qualify as “primarily for the benefit of the employer” turns on “whether the employment- related cost is a personal expense that would arise as a normal living expense.”

Show all 18 citing cases →

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.