Encino Motorcars, LLC v. Navarro (579 U.S. 211)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided June 20, 2016 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 579 U.S. 211 · 136 S. Ct. 2117
- Decided
- June 20, 2016
- Term
- October Term 2015
- Vote
- 6–2
- Majority author
- Justice Kennedy
- Issue area
- Unions
- Disposition
- Vacated and remanded
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
Justice KENNEDY delivered the opinion of the Court. This case addresses whether a federal statute requires payment of increased compensation to certain automobile dealership employees for overtime work. The federal statute in question is the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq., enacted in 1938 to "protect all covered workers from substandard wages and oppressive working hours." Barrentine v. Arkansas-Best Freight System, Inc., 450 U.S. 728, 739, 101 S.Ct. 1437, 67 L.Ed.2d 641 (1981). Among its other provisions, the FLSA requires employers to pay overtime compensation to covered employees who work more than 40 hours in a given week. The rate of overtime pay must be "not less than one and one-half times the regular rate" of the employee's pay. § 207(a). Five current and former service advisors brought this suit alleging that the automobile dealership where they were employed was required by the FLSA to pay them overtime wages. The dealership contends that the position and duties of a service advisor bring these employees within § 213(b)(10)(A), which establishes an exemption from the FLSA overtime provisions for certain employees engaged in selling or servicing automobiles. The case turns on the interpretation of this exemption. I A Automobile dealerships in many communities not only sell vehicles but also sell repair and maintenance services. Among the…
Excerpt of a 36,009-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.