C.F.R. » Title 29 » CHAPTER V—WAGE AND HOUR DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR › SUBCHAPTER B—STATEMENTS OF GENERAL POLICY OR INTERPRETATION NOT DIRECTLY RELATED TO REGULATIONS › PART 785—HOURS WORKED › Subpart C—Application of Principles

29 C.F.R. § 785.27

General

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

Attendance at lectures, meetings, training programs and similar activities need not be counted as working time if the following four criteria are met:

(a) Attendance is outside of the employee's regular working hours;

(b) Attendance is in fact voluntary;

(c) The course, lecture, or meeting is not directly related to the employee's job; and

(d) The employee does not perform any productive work during such attendance.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 42 cases (7 in the last 5 years), 1974–2025 · leading case: Nancy Kosakow v. New Rochelle Radiology Assocs., P.C., 274 F.3d 706 (2d Cir. 2001).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Nancy Kosakow v. New Rochelle Radiology Assocs., P.C., 274 F.3d 706 (2d Cir. 2001). · cites it 3× “29 C.F.R. § 785.27 . New Rochelle argues that the above criteria are met.”
Elaine L. Chao, Sec'y of Labor, United States Dep't of Labor v. Tradesmen Int'l, Inc., 310 F.3d 904 (6th Cir. 2002). · cites it 4× “The issue in this case is whether an employee’s attendance at a safety training course is “involuntary” and within the meaning of 29 C.F.R. §§ 785.27 -.28 (2002) and therefore compensable under the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.”
Harris v. Vector Mktg. Corp., 753 F. Supp. 2d 996 (N.D. Cal. 2010). · cites it 2× “The Court notes that final certification is appropriate even taking into account that, assuming trainees are employees, an inquiry must still be made under 29 C.F.R. § 785.27 as to whether the training time should be counted as working time.”
Harris v. Vector Mktg. Corp., 716 F. Supp. 2d 835 (N.D. Cal. 2010). · cites it 2× “29 C.F.R. § 785.27 . While it is unclear whether this test applies once a trainee is found to be employed within the meaning of the FLSA under the Portland Terminal or the DOL test, this Court has previously noted in its summary judgment order that it is “doubtful whether…”
Julian v. Swift Transp. Co., 360 F. Supp. 3d 932 (D. Ariz. 2018). · cites it 2× “Thus, the reasoning by the First and Sixth Circuits-that an employer should not be penalized for allowing an individual to work while obtaining a job qualification the employer could have imposed from the start-has no application here.”
Fowler v. Incor, 279 F. App'x 590 (10th Cir. 2008). · cites it 2× “To that end, the DOL has promulgated regulations regarding training, including 29 C.F.R. § 785.27 , which provides: Attendance at lectures, meetings, training programs and similar activities need not be counted as working time if the following four criteria are met: (a)…”
Karen Lynn Bienkowski, David Eberle, Delia Ann Hoye & Edward McDonald v. Ne. Univ., 285 F.3d 138 (1st Cir. 2002). “One of those regulations, 29 C.F.R. § 785.27 , makes training non-compensable if, inter alia, it is both voluntary and unrelated to the employee’s job — conditions that do not appear to be satisfied here.”
Harris v. Vector Mktg. Corp., 656 F. Supp. 2d 1128 (N.D. Cal. 2009). · cites it 2× “[ 4 ] 29 C.F.R. § 785.27 (emphasis added). In the instant case, there is a genuine dispute of material fact as to at least one of the criteria above — ie.”
Maynor v. Dow Chem. Co., 671 F. Supp. 2d 902 (S.D. Tex. 2009). · cites it 2× “29 C.F.R. § 785.27 . Time spent on training and similar activities must satisfy all four criteria to be exempt from treatment as compensable time.”
Chime v. Peak Sec. Plus, Inc., 137 F. Supp. 3d 183 (E.D.N.Y 2015). “See 29 C.F.R. § 785.27 . The plaintiff’s allegations sufficiently plead that the first two of these requirements are not satisfied, and accordingly that the time spent in training may be compensable.”
Bull v. United States, 68 Fed. Cl. 212 (Fed. Cl. 2005). “” 29 C.F.R. § 785.27 . . DOL's analogous regulations provide that "[ajttendance is not voluntary, of course, if it is required by the employer.”
Haszard v. Am. Med. Response Nw., Inc., 237 F. Supp. 2d 1151 (D. Or. 2001). · cites it 7× “In particular, plaintiffs claim that their training is not “voluntary” or is “directly related” to their jobs and, therefore, must be paid as “working time” under 29 CFR § 785.27 . Accordingly, plaintiffs seek declaratory and injunctive relief, an accounting, and judgment…”
Show all 42 citing 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.