Here’s a look at a few cases that may have implications for employers‼️
1️⃣ E.M.D. Sales, Inc. v. Carrera | Evidentiary Burdens of Proof for Applicability of FLSA Exemptions
This case focuses on the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and the evidentiary standard employers must meet to prove that an employee qualifies for one of the FLSA’s exemptions (e.g., for outside salespersons, executives, etc.). In this case, sales representatives sued their employer for unpaid overtime, claiming they were entitled to overtime pay under the FLSA. The employer argued they were exempt under the “outside salesperson” category.
❓Key Question❓ Whether the employer must meet a preponderance of the evidence standard (as held by six circuits) or a clear and convincing evidence standard (as the Fourth Circuit ruled). Keep in mind, the “clear and convincing” evidence standard would make it more difficult to prove an exemption.
🚨 Implications for Employers: If the Supreme Court sides with the Fourth Circuit’s stricter standard, it could increase the burden on employers to prove that workers are exempt from overtime pay under FLSA.
2️⃣ Lackey v. Stinnie | Availability of Attorney Fee Awards to Prevailing Parties on Preliminary Injunctions
This case involves the ability of parties who win a preliminary injunction but do not ultimately prevail in the case to seek attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988, which is a federal statute that allows attorney fees for “prevailing parties” in civil rights cases, including those brought under employment-related statutes like 42 U.S.C. § 1981.
❓Key Questions❓
1️⃣ Does winning a preliminary injunction without a final ruling on the merits make a party eligible for attorney fees under § 1988?
2️⃣ Must the party obtain a lasting change in the legal relationship between the parties to qualify as a “prevailing party”?
🚨Implications for Employers: A ruling that allows fee recovery for preliminary injunctions could affect employers facing § 1981 claims (e.g., race-based discrimination cases) by increasing the potential legal costs if plaintiffs can recover fees without a final win on the merits.
These cases, which will be heard in November and October 2024, respectively, could have substantial effects on employment litigation and employer strategies in defending FLSA and civil rights claims. More cases with employer implications may also emerge as the Court’s term progresses.
Stay tuned for further updates.