HR Hero Your Employment Law Resource


HR Hero Line - HR & employment law tips, news, etc
Diversity Insight - Real-life lessons in diversity management
Northern Exposure - Canadian Employment Law for U.S. Businesses
We respect your privacy
 

Tip of the Week
Home > HR News
Bookmark and Share Send to a Colleague

What to do when
workers break equipment

October 19, 2007




What do you do if you have employees who happen to lose or destroy company property over and over again? Can you recoup the costs by docking their pay? How about requiring them to make out-of-pocket payments to cover replacement costs? Wage and hour law limits what you can and can't do in this regard.

FLSA
In 2006, the U.S. Department of Labor's (DOL) Wage and Hour Division issued an opinion letter regarding whether exempt employees could be fined for the repair or replacement costs of company property, such as cell phones and laptop computers, that is lost or damaged. The company making the inquiry was open to either a payroll deduction or an out-of-pocket reimbursement.

As you know, the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) exempts bona fide executive, administrative, and professional employees from overtime requirements. To qualify for the exemption, among other things, a salary-basis requirement must be met.

The DOL opined that any salary deduction for lost or damaged company property violates the salary-basis requirement of the exemption, thus endangering the employee's exempt status. It doesn't matter whether you implement a policy of making periodic deductions from employee salaries or requiring employees to make out-of-pocket reimbursements from compensation already received. You simply can't do that.

What about nonexempt employees? The DOL opined that you may not require them to pay for an expense of your business if doing so reduces their pay below any statutorily required minimum wage or overtime premium that's due. That's because you must pay all statutorily required minimum wages and overtime premiums "free and clear."

In other words, deductions are permissible so long as they don't cause nonexempt employees' wages to fall below the minimum wage for the pay period and don't take away the overtime wages that were earned.

What about deductions for employee carelessness?

No doubt about it, employee carelessness can be very costly for you. Some of the equipment you provide employees in today's high-tech world, such as laptop computers and BlackBerries, can be quite expensive.

Pay-docking policies, however, can create a lack of trust, anger, and resentment in your workplace. They also can breed secrecy. For example, if an employee thinks there would be a detrimental consequence for losing company property, he may be reluctant to report it. That could be extremely damaging to you if that missing piece of equipment contains confidential information.

On the other hand, why should you tolerate careless employees costing you big bucks? The DOL's opinion letter doesn't address whether an employee may be disciplined for losing or destroying company property. Thus, you may find it appropriate to handle incidents of carelessness as you would any other performance issue. Training sessions may be a good idea as well.

Bottom line

You certainly don't want company dollars to be lost, but you need to carefully consider the way you handle damaged or lost property. Not only do you want to avoid discontent and secrecy, but you also don't want to violate the law and end up paying more in legal damages and fees than you would if you had simply assumed the loss and moved on.

Copyright 2007 M. Lee Smith Publishers LLC. WEST VIRGINIA EMPLOYMENT LAW LETTER should not be construed as legal advice or a legal opinion on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information purposes only. Anyone needing specific legal advice should consult an attorney. The State Bar of West Virginia does not certify specialists in the law, and we do not claim certification in any listed area. For further information about the content of any article in this newsletter, please contact any of the editors.


Additional resources on HRhero.com

designates additional valuable resources available exclusively to Employment Law Letter subscribers.

Outside salesperson exemption under FLSA: new guidance
  Oklahoma Employment Law Letter, August 2008
Office in your pocket: BlackBerry® use may lead to overtime lawsuits
  New York Employment Law Letter, July 2008
Summer interns: Must they be paid?
  Virginia Employment Law Letter, July 2008
Is an off-duty but on-call employee 'working'?
  New Hampshire Employment Law Letter, June2008
Avoiding costly overtime lawsuits
  Virginia Employment Law Letter, June 2008
Compensable work under the FLSA
  New York Employment Law Letter, June 2008
ComEd victory illuminates on-call pay issues
  Illinois Employment Law Letter, May 2008
Wage and hour lawsuits: potential major liability for most employers
  Georgia Employment LawLetter, May 2008
Summer interns: To pay or not to pay?
  New Jersey Employment Law Letter, April 2008
FLSA collective actions spell trouble for employers
  Arizona Employment Law Letter, April2008
Learning the hard way: Improper pay policy proves costly
  Connecticut Employment Law Letter,April 2008
The long and winding road (and uncertain future) of the companionship exemption
  OklahomaEmployment Law Letter, March 2008
You are your brother's keeper: Employer owes for unauthorized overtime
  New York EmploymentLaw Letter, March 2008
Overtime class-action claims continue to spike
  Federal Employment Law Insider, November2007
Trial judge denies FLSA retaliation claim
  South Carolina Employment Law Letter, October2007
Home care workers and the FLSA
  Pennsylvania Employment Law Letter, October 2007
Two recent FLSA decisions favor employers on time spent traveling to job site
  FederalEmployment Law Insider, July 2007
Dress code violations: Are your interns dressed in employee uniforms?
  New York EmploymentLaw Letter, July 2007
Sleeping on the job: the FLSA and compensable sleep time
  Arizona Employment Law Letter, May2007
FLSA doesn't cover work in business relationship between romantic partners
  South CarolinaEmployment Law Letter, March 2007

HR Tools for FLSA

Do You Know the Law in Your State?
Employment law attorneys in your state keep track of new state and federal developments for many of your peers already via a monthly state-specific newsletter. Each issue is only 8 pages and packed with news, analysis, and practical how-to HR solutions. To learn more about your state's Employment Law Letter and the professionals that craft it, click here.

:Return to HR Hero Line e-zine for more tips and articles

     

Bookmark and Share Send to a Colleague
Subscriber Login
M Lee Smith Publishers