29 C.F.R. § 778.321
Decrease in hours without decreasing pay—general
Since the regular rate of pay is the average hourly rate at which an employee is actually employed, and since this rate is determined by dividing his total remuneration for employment (except statutory exclusions) for a given workweek by the total hours worked in that workweek for which such remuneration was paid, it necessarily follows that if the schedule of hours is reduced while the pay remains the same, the regular rate has been increased.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3
cases, 2003–2005 · leading case: Doo Nam Yang v. ACBL CORP., 427 F. Supp. 2d 327 (S.D.N.Y. 2005).
Doo Nam Yang v. ACBL CORP., 427 F. Supp. 2d 327 (S.D.N.Y. 2005). “See 29 C.F.R. § 778.321 . [31] Labor Day off [32] From November 20 to December 22, plaintiff worked Monday through Friday, from 9 a.”
O'HARA v. Menino, 253 F. Supp. 2d 147 (D. Mass. 2003). “” 29 C.F.R. § 778.321 . Although the lunch period payment is considered remuneration for employment or regular compensation under the CBA, there is no explicit agreement to treat this time as working hours.”
Harris v. City of Boston, 253 F. Supp. 2d 136 (D. Mass. 2003). “” 29 C.F.R. § 778.321 . Although the lunch period payment is considered remuneration for employment or regular compensation under the CBA, there is no explicit agreement to treat this time as working hours.”
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.