29 C.F.R. § 778.210

Percentage of total earnings as bonus

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

In some instances the contract or plan for the payment of a bonus may also provide for the simultaneous payment of overtime compensation due on the bonus. For example, a contract made prior to the performance of services may provide for the payment of additional compensation in the way of a bonus at the rate of 10 percent of the employee's straight-time earnings, and 10 percent of his overtime earnings. In such instances, of course, payments according to the contract will satisfy in full the overtime provisions of the Act and no recomputation will be required. This is not true, however, where this form of payment is used as a device to evade the overtime requirements of the Act rather than to provide actual overtime compensation, as described in §§ 778.502 and 778.503.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 15 cases (10 in the last 5 years), 1988–2025 · leading case: William Hornady v. Outokumpu Stainless USA, LLC, 118 F.4th 1367 (11th Cir. 2024).
William Hornady v. Outokumpu Stainless USA, LLC, 118 F.4th 1367 (11th Cir. 2024). “” 29 C.F.R. §§ 778.210 , 778.503. These bonuses, in other words, “provide for the simultaneous payment of overtime compensation due on the bonus.”
Weninger v. Gen. Mills Operations LLC, 344 F. Supp. 3d 1005 (E.D. Wis. 2018). · cites it 2× “29 C.F.R. § 778.210 . 2 From a mathematical perspective, a percentage bonus under Section 778.”
Robert B. Reich, Sec'y of Labor v. Interstate Brands Corp., 57 F.3d 574 (7th Cir. 1995). “1942); 29 C.F.R. §§ 778.210 , 778.212(b). Interstate Brands would have us believe that Minizza v.”
Int'l Ass'n of Firefighters, Local 349 v. City of Rome, 682 F. Supp. 522 (N.D. Ga. 1988). “1986) (under 29 C.F.R. § 778.210 , bonus was not premium excludable from regular rate of pay for computing overtime, where bonus was not a sham or device to evade overtime requirements of the Act).”
Breig v. Covanta Holding Corp. (E.D. Pa. 2022). · cites it 5× “28 26 29 C.F.R. § 778.210 . Section 778.502 concerns “[a]rtificially labeling part of the regular wages a ‘bonus’” and § 778.”
Barragan v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. (S.D. Cal. 2021). · cites it 3× “See 29 C.F.R. § 778.210 . In other words, an employer is not liable for 1 additional overtime pay when they offer “percentage-based bonuses.”
Bryan Madeira v. Converse, Inc. (9th Cir. 2023). · cites it 2× “The pertinent federal standard is found in 29 C.F.R. § 778.210 : “a bonus paid as a predetermined percentage of an employee’s straight-time and overtime compensation increases the straight-time and overtime earnings by the same percentage, and thereby includes proper…”
Gibson v. Outokumpu Stainless Steel USA, LLC (S.D. Ala. 2023). · cites it 2× “3d at 1182-1183 (citing 29 C.F.R. § 778.210 and Brock v. Two R Drilling Co.”
Akers v. Tim Jungblut Trucking, Inc. (S.D. Ind. 2020). · cites it 2× “” 29 C.F.R. § 778.210 . The regulation states: In some instances the contract or plan for the payment of a bonus may also provide for the simultaneous payment of overtime compensation due on the bonus.”
Marisha Russell v. Geico (9th Cir. 2019). “GEICO opted to calculate its cash payments as outlined in 29 C.F.R. § 778.210 , not § 778.209, and § 778.”
Lemm v. Ecolab (Cal. Ct. App. 2023). “Ecolab relied on federal law, specifically 29 C.F.R. section 778.210 (CFR 778.210), for its method of calculating the overtime 2 The most recent version of the DLSE Manual is published online.”
Hornady v. Outokumpu Stainless USA, LLC (S.D. Ala. 2022). “1986) and 29 C.F.R. § 778.210 ). From a mathematical perspective, a percentage bonus under Section 778.”
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.