(a) Weekly salary. If the employee is employed solely on a weekly salary basis, the regular hourly rate of pay, on which time and a half must be paid, is computed by dividing the salary by the number of hours which the salary is intended to compensate. If an employee is hired at a salary of $350 and if it is understood that this salary is compensation for a regular workweek of 35 hours, the employee's regular rate of pay is $350 divided by 35 hours, or $10 an hour, and when the employee works overtime the employee is entitled to receive $10 for each of the first 40 hours and $15 (one and one-half times $10) for each hour thereafter. If an employee is hired at a salary of $375 for a 40-hour week the regular rate is $9.38 an hour.
(b) Salary for periods other than workweek. Where the salary covers a period longer than a workweek, such as a month, it must be reduced to its workweek equivalent. A monthly salary is subject to translation to its equivalent weekly wage by multiplying by 12 (the number of months) and dividing by 52 (the number of weeks). A semimonthly salary is translated into its equivalent weekly wage by multiplying by 24 and dividing by 52. Once the weekly wage is arrived at, the regular hourly rate of pay will be calculated as indicated above. The regular rate of an employee who is paid a regular monthly salary of $1,560, or a regular semimonthly salary of $780 for 40 hours a week, is thus found to be $9 per hour. Under regulations of the Administrator, pursuant to the authority given to him in section 7(g)(3) of the Act, the parties may provide that the regular rates shall be determined by dividing the monthly salary by the number of working days in the month and then by the number of hours of the normal or regular workday. Of course, the resultant rate in such a case must not be less than the statutory minimum wage.
[46 FR 7310, Jan. 23, 1981, as amended at 76 FR 18857, Apr. 5, 2011]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
134
cases (
30 in the last 5 years), 1967–2026 · leading case:
Abbey v. United States, 99 Fed. Cl. 430 (Fed. Cl. 2011).
Abbey v. United States, 99 Fed. Cl. 430 (Fed. Cl. 2011).
· cites it 19× “The court focuses on the following in reaching its decision: (1) 29 C.F.R. § 778.113 , which plaintiffs primarily on, does not apply to FAA employees; (2) 5 C.”
Singer v. City of Waco, Texas, 324 F.3d 813 (5th Cir. 2003).
· cites it 2× “The district court thus took the fire fighters’ yearly salary *824 and divided it by 26 (the number of 14-day work periods in a single year) to determine the fire fighters’ work period salary.”
Abigail Ransom v. M. Patel Enter., Inc, 734 F.3d 377 (5th Cir. 2013).
· cites it 3× “” See 29 C.F.R. § 778.113 (a). As for the second question, he noted that the FLSA in its plain terms required that a non-exempt employee be paid one and one-half times his or her regular rate for all hours worked over 40, see 29 U.”
Johnson v. Big Lots Stores, Inc., 604 F. Supp. 2d 903 (E.D. La. 2009).
· cites it 4× “29 C.F.R. § 778.113 . Salaries for periods longer than a week are to be reduced to their workweek equivalent.”
John Zimmerli v. The City of Kansas City, MO, 996 F.3d 857 (8th Cir. 2021).
· cites it 2× “Plaintiffs rely on 29 C.F.R. § 778.113 , which sets the standards for determining the regular rate of an employee employed solely on a salaried basis.”
Hunter v. Sprint Corp., 453 F. Supp. 2d 44 (D.D.C. 2006).
· cites it 2× “See 29 C.F.R. § 778.113 (a). 20 To recapitulate, the Court concludes that, under the circumstances presented by this case, it would be inappropriate retroactively to apply the FWW method to determine Price’s “regular rate” of pay under the FLSA.”
O'Brien v. Town of Agawam, 350 F.3d 279 (1st Cir. 2003).
“29 C.F.R. § 778.113 (a). The other is the fluctuating workweek method, which applies when an employee “is paid a fixed weekly salary regardless of how many hours the employee may work in a given week.”
Goodrow v. Lane Bryant, Inc., 732 N.E.2d 289 (Mass. 2000).
· cites it 2× “” 10 29 C.F.R. § 778.113 (2000). The regular rate of pay for salaried employees whose hourly work week varies, and who have an understanding with their employers that their fixed salary constitutes straight-time pay for whatever hours they are called on to work in a work week is…”
Rodriguez v. Farm Stores Grocery, Inc., 518 F.3d 1259 (11th Cir. 2008).
“29 C.F.R. § 778.113 (a) (2002). In the situation here, where the employee is paid solely on a weekly salary basis, the number of hours the employee’s pay is intended to compensate — not necessarily the number of hours he actually works — -is the divisor.”
— 29 C.F.R. § 778.113(a) — 2 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.