29 C.F.R. § 776.5

Coverage not dependent on method of compensation

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

The Act's individual employee coverage is not limited to employees working on an hourly wage. The requirements of section 6 as to minimum wages are that “each” employee described therein shall be paid wages at a rate not less than a specified rate “an hour”. 15 This does not mean that employees cannot be paid on a piecework basis or on a salary, commission, or other basis; it merely means that whatever the basis on which the workers are paid, whether it be monthly, weekly, or on a piecework basis, they must receive at least the equivalent of the minimum hourly rate. “Each” and “any” employee obviously and necessarily includes one compensated by a unit of time, by the piece, or by any other measurement. 16 Regulations prescribed by the Administrator (part 516 of this chapter) provide for the keeping of records in such form as to enable compensation on a piecework or other basis to be translated into an hourly rate. 17

15 Special exceptions are made for Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and American Samoa.

16United States v. Rosenwasser, 323 U.S. 360.

17 For methods of translating other forms of compensation into an hourly rate for purposes of sections 6 and 7, see parts 531 and 778 of this chapter.

[35 FR 5543, Apr. 3, 1970]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 6 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2011–2021 · leading case: Gaxiola v. Williams Seafood of Arapahoe, Inc., 776 F. Supp. 2d 117 (E.D.N.C. 2011).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Gaxiola v. Williams Seafood of Arapahoe, Inc., 776 F. Supp. 2d 117 (E.D.N.C. 2011). “Plaintiffs seek summary judgment as to defendants’ liability on their claim that workers paid on a piece-rate basis did not receive minimum wage for all hours worked as required by the FLSA.”

D'Arezzo v. Providence Ctr., Inc., 142 F. Supp. 3d 224 (D.R.I. 2015). · cites it 2× “The most natural explanation for why the FLSA does not provide a measuring rod for minimum wage violations is because a one-size-fits-all measuring rod would not make sense in light of the varied methods of compensation agreed to by covered employees. Instead, the courts must…”

Boyer v. Celerity Solutions Grp., LLC (D. Colo. 2020). “29 C.F.R. § 776.5 (“The Act’s individual employee coverage is not limited to employees working on an hourly wage.”

Maldanado v. Cultural Care, Inc. (D. Mass. 2021). “See 29 C.F.R. §§ 776.5 , 778.111; accord Montoya v.”

Boyd v. SFS Commc'ns, LLC (D. Maryland 2021). “§ 3-413 ; see also 29 C.F.R. § 776.5 (providing that minimum wage provision “not limited to employees working on an hourly wage”).”

Southwick v. Health Afiliates Maine, LLC (Me. Super. Ct 2019). “29 C.F.R. § 776.5 . As to an employee's use of a personal vehicle for work purposes, the analysis is similar.”

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.