Francis Bernard Auer, et al. v. David A. Robbins et al. (519 U.S. 452)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided February 19, 1997 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 519 U.S. 452 · 117 S. Ct. 905
- Decided
- February 19, 1997
- Term
- October Term 1996
- Vote
- 9–0
- Majority author
- Justice Scalia
- Issue area
- Unions
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Outcome
- Petitioning party lost
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
Justice Scalia delivered the opinion of the Court. The Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (FLSA), 52 Stat. 1060, as amended, 29 U. S. C. §§201 et seq., exempts “bona fide executive, administrative, or professional” employees from overtime pay requirements. This case presents the question whether the Secretary of Labor’s “salary-basis” test for determining an employee’s exempt status reflects a permissible reading of the statute as it applies to public-sector employees. We also consider whether the Secretary has reasonably interpreted the salary-basis test to deny an employee salaried status (and thus grant him overtime pay) when his compensation may “as a practical matter” be adjusted in ways inconsistent with the test. I Petitioners are sergeants and a lieutenant employed by the St. Louis Police Department. They brought suit in 1988 against respondents, members of the St. Louis Board of Police Commissioners, seeking payment of overtime pay that they claimed was owed under § 7(a)(1) of the FLSA, 29 U. S. C. § 207(a)(1). Respondents argued that petitioners were not entitled to such pay because they came within the exemption provided by § 213(a)(1) for “bona fide executive, administrative, or professional” employees. Under regulations promulgated by the Secretary, one requirement for exempt status under § 213(a)(1) is that the employee earn a specified minimum amount on a “salary…
Excerpt of a 19,411-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.