29 C.F.R. § 541.708
Combination exemptions
Employees who perform a combination of exempt duties as set forth in the regulations in this part for executive, administrative, professional, outside sales and computer employees may qualify for exemption. Thus, for example, an employee whose primary duty involves a combination of exempt administrative and exempt executive work may qualify for exemption. In other words, work that is exempt under one section of this part will not defeat the exemption under any other section.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 39
cases (10 in the last 5 years), 2007–2026 · leading case: IntraComm, Inc. v. Bajaj, 492 F.3d 285 (4th Cir. 2007).
IntraComm, Inc. v. Bajaj, 492 F.3d 285 (4th Cir. 2007). “The district court held that Habibi was not exempt from the FLSA’s minimum-wage requirements under the FLSA’s “combination exemption,” 29 C.F.R. § 541.708 (2006), and therefore was owed minimum wage for approximately 300 hours he worked without direct compensation.”
Rivet v. Off. Depot, Inc., 207 F. Supp. 3d 417 (D.N.J. 2016). “The Combination Exemption, ( 29 C.F.R. § 541.708 ): Applies to an employee who performs “a combination of exempt duties as set forth in the regulations in this part for executive, administrative, professional, outside sales and computer employees .”
Callari ex rel. Blackman Plumbing Supply, Inc. v. Blackman Plumbing Supply, Inc., 988 F. Supp. 2d 261 (E.D.N.Y 2013). “(quoting 29 C.F.R. § 541.708 ). In this regard, “employees whose primary duty involves a combination of exempt administrative and exempt executive work may qualify as exempt workers, despite the fact that their duties fit neatly within neither *277 the executive nor the…”
Schmidt v. Eagle Waste & Recycling, Inc., 598 F. Supp. 2d 928 (W.D. Wis. 2009). “However, even if plaintiffs primary duty did not involve sales, under the “combination exemption,” 29 C.F.R. § 541.708 , plaintiff would not be entitled to overtime compensation because all of her duties involved exempt work under the Fair Labor Standards Act.”
Schmidt v. Eagle Waste & Recycling, Inc., 599 F.3d 626 (7th Cir. 2010). “” 29 C.F.R. § 541.708 (2009). Eagle argues that to the extent Schmidt performed duties unrelated to outside sales, these were largely exempt “administrative” duties.”
Raniere v. Citigroup Inc., 827 F. Supp. 2d 294 (S.D.N.Y. 2011). “601 (a) (highly compensated employee exemption); 29 C.F.R. § 541.708 (combination exemption).”
Hundt v. Directsat USA, LLC, 294 F.R.D. 101 (N.D. Ill. 2013). “29 C.F.R. § 541.708 . According to the defendants, the undisputed evidence establishes that Hundt fell under the executive, administrative, and combination exemptions.”
Hill v. R+ L Carriers, Inc., 690 F. Supp. 2d 1001 (N.D. Cal. 2010). “” 29 C.F.R. § 541.708 . California appears to-recognize a similar “combination” exemption.”
Longlois v. Stratasys, Inc., 88 F. Supp. 3d 1058 (D. Minnesota 2015). “” 29 C.F.R. § 541.708 . Stratasys argues that the FLSA’s administrative and/or combination exemptions applied to Longlois in his job as an FSE prior to January of 2013.”
Indergit v. Rite Aid Corp., 293 F.R.D. 632 (S.D.N.Y. 2013). “These regulations also provide for a “combination exemption,” which applies to those employees who “perform a combination of exempt duties as set forth in the regulations____”29 C.F.R. § 541.708. Accordingly, employees “whose primary duty involves a combination of exempt…”
Benedict v. Hewlett-Packard Co., 314 F.R.D. 457 (N.D. Cal. 2016). “See 29 C.F.R. § 541.708 ; Hill v. R + L Carriers, Inc.”
Arasimowicz v. All Panel Sys., LLC, 948 F. Supp. 2d 211 (D. Conn. 2013). “” 29 C.F.R. 541.708;' see Kadden v. VisuaLex, LLC, 910 F.”
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.