29 C.F.R. § 776.0

Subpart limited to individual employee coverage

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

This subpart, which was adopted before the amendments of 1961 and 1966 to the Fair Labor Standards Act, is limited to discussion of general coverage of the Act on the traditional basis of engagement by individual employees “in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce”. The 1961 and 1966 amendments broadened coverage by extending it to other employees on an “enterprise” basis, when “employed in an enterprise engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce” as defined in section 3 (r), (s), of the present Act. Employees covered under the principles discussed in this subpart remain covered under the Act as amended; however, an employee who would not be individually covered under the principles discussed in this subpart may now be subject to the Act if he is employed in a covered enterprise as defined in the amendments. Questions of “enterprise coverage” not answered in published statements of the Department of Labor may be addressed to the Administrator of the Wage and Hour Division, Department of Labor, Washington, DC 20210 or assistance may be requested from any of the Regional or District Offices of the Division.

[35 FR 5543, Apr. 3, 1970]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1997–2016 · leading case: Morales v. 22nd Dist. Agric. Ass'n, 26 Wage & Hour Cas.2d (BNA) 1286 (Cal. Ct. App. 2016).
Morales v. 22nd Dist. Agric. Ass'n, 26 Wage & Hour Cas.2d (BNA) 1286 (Cal. Ct. App. 2016). “’ ” ( 29 C.F.R. § 776.0 (2015).) These regulations do not address whether particular employees, who come under the purview of the FLSA, are subject to an exemption.”
Norceide v. Cambridge Health All., 814 F. Supp. 2d 17 (D. Mass. 2011). “See 29 C.F.R. § 776.0 , et seq.; see Dove, 759 F.”
Jerome v. Zorich & Robert Wirkkala v. Long Beach Fire Dep't & Ambulance Serv., Inc., 118 F.3d 682 (9th Cir. 1997). “29 C.F.R. § 776.0 (1996); see id. § 776.2 (“[Coverage] thus becomes primarily an individual matter as to the nature of the employment of the particular employee.”
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.