Professional Exemption?

I know this may sound dumb, but will put it out there anyway... :-) We are a chemical recycling company and have chemists in our lab as well as chemists that do "lab packs" at customer sites. These positions (different levels) require either 2 yr degree or 4 yr degree (in a science field). Would you consider them still "blue collar" (where they would get OT regardless of education) or should they be considered exempt with no overtime?

Comments

  • 5 Comments sorted by Votes Date Added
  • KYMM: No question or issue is a "dumb one"! Just based on what you have written and without further investigation into the given task accomplished by this lab tech, and given they are compensated with a base rate of $455.00 per week, I can make a case for EXEMPT under both the Administraive Employee or the Learned Professional Employee categories of Exemptions from the O/T rules. First test is the base compensation rate of pay at $455.00 per week gross. Any amount of money below that rate calls for a non-exempt status, regardless of their job task and supervisory responsibilities.
    The 2nd test then is the written description based on task required, while performing work of substancial importance or performing work requiring a high level of skill or training. If your task list are 80% physical activity then these task must be of substantial importance.

    "Substantial Importance" is not defined and will most likely be areas of litegation, so if your company is going to make a change from O/T received to NO O/T, I would insure my company has a clear understanding of what these words mean to your company.

    Hope this helps.

    PORK
  • Here are the guidelines for a learned professional under the new regs that are effective today.

    Here is the link to the Federal Register:

    [url]http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/fedreg/a040423c.html#Wage and Hour Division[/url]


    § 541.301 Learned professionals.

    (a) To qualify for the learned professional exemption, an employee’s primary duty must
    be the performance of work requiring advanced knowledge in a field of science or learning customarily acquired by a prolonged course of specialized intellectual instruction. This primary duty test includes three elements:

    (1) The employee must perform work requiring advanced knowledge;
    The phrase “work requiring advanced knowledge” means work which is predominantly intellectual in character, and which includes work requiring the consistent exercise of discretion and judgment, as distinguished from performance of routine mental, manual, mechanical or physical work. An employee who performs work requiring advanced knowledge generally uses the advanced knowledge to analyze, interpret or make deductions from varying facts or circumstances. Advanced knowledge cannot be attained at the high school level.

    (2) The advanced knowledge must be in a field of science or learning; and
    The phrase “field of science or learning” includes the traditional professions of law, medicine, theology, accounting, actuarial computation, engineering, architecture, teaching, various types of physical, chemical and biological sciences, pharmacy and other similar occupations that have a recognized professional status as distinguished from the mechanical arts or skilled trades where in some instances the knowledge is of a fairly advanced type, but is not in a field of science or learning.

    (3) The advanced knowledge must be customarily acquired by a prolonged course of
    specialized intellectual instruction.
    The phrase “customarily acquired by a prolonged course of specialized intellectual
    instruction” restricts the exemption to professions where specialized academic training is
    a standard prerequisite for entrance into the profession. The best prima facie evidence
    that an employee meets this requirement is possession of the appropriate academic
    degree. However, the word “customarily” means that the exemption is also available to
    employees in such professions who have substantially the same knowledge level and
    perform substantially the same work as the degreed employees, but who attained the
    advanced knowledge through a combination of work experience and intellectual instruction. Thus, for example, the learned professional exemption is available to the occasional lawyer who has not gone to law school, or the occasional chemist who is not the possessor of a degree in chemistry. However, the learned professional exemption is
    not available for occupations that customarily may be performed with only the general knowledge acquired by an academic degree in any field, with knowledge acquired through an apprenticeship, or with training in the performance of routine mental, manual, mechanical or physical processes.

    The learned professional exemption also does not apply to occupations in which most employees have acquired their skill by experience rather than by advanced specialized intellectual instruction.
  • I guess I'm hesitant in regards to whether or not they should be considered "blue collar".. yes, they may have a 2 yr degree but their work is very much "physical" and they do gain their knowledge and skills by doing fairly routine manual and physical work through on-the-job training. In looking at the Federal Register, I'm just feeling that we should still consider them "blue collar"... am I off base?
  • If your company management has no objections, you can not go wrong by classifying them as non-exempt and paying them overtime.
  • Problem being that money is extremely "tight" right now and we can't afford to be overly "generous" if it's not required. :-( I would prefer to keep them getting overtime, however, I just want to make sure that I am not incorrect in classifying them as "blue-collar" and have it come back to haunt me.
Sign In or Register to comment.