Works 37.5, paid for 40

KStater

We recently hired a new staff accountant and reclassified the position to non-exempt (which it should have been all long). The Director has decided to pay this employee for her 30 minute lunch break (as it is done for the exempt administrative staff), so she actually works 37.5 hours, but is paid for 40. OT is based on hours worked, not hours paid, right? So this employee needs to actually work over 40 hours to be eligible for OT, correct? I'm not sure the Director is making that distinction. We also have a non-exempt mechanic, but I don't think his lunch is paid. Isn't there a problem if the two aren't treated the same? Would they be considered similarly situated, even though one is administrative and one is not? Thanks in advance for your feedback!

Don D

You are correct that overtime, according to federal standards, is based on hours actually worked, not paid. I know of many situations where office/administrative staff are under a separate set of policies.....as long as neither is paid in violation of the FLSA, and it seems neither is.

KStater

Okay, that makes sense. But what about the non-exempt mechanic that doesn't work in the office; do we need to pay for his lunch too, or is it ok to have him clock out for lunch while we pay for this other non-exempt person's lunch?

Parabeagle

Correct. Our administrative staffers are paid based on a 37.5 hour week. If they work between 37.5 and 40 hours, the add'l is paid at straight time. Only if they exceed 40 in a workweek does OT kick in.