Part-time AND Exempt?
ReneePHR
1 Post
We have an employee that is categorized as professional exempt. However, she is part-time. I was just reading an article from HR Hero that stated that exempt employees cannot be paid hourly, but must be paid salaried. If this is the case, is it possible to have a part-time, exempt employee? If so, I assume we would need to determine a salary based on her normal number of hours worked. What if her normal hours are 30, but for a few months she works in excess of 40? Has anyone else ever had this situation?
Comments
I JUST GIVE UP! Thanks for listening to my tirade.
The biggest problem is our "controller" and I use that term loosely. She is supposed to work 36 hours a week, but here is her "normal" schedule. She drags into the office about 9AM - she leaves around 12 to have a "run" every day and gets back into the office 1:30 or 2PM. She then leaves at 4 or 4:30 at least three days a week to play tennis with her "ladies who lunch" group. She is constantly shoving work onto her limited staff to do what she doesn't want to be bothered with. The staff has finally caught on and refers to her as "that bitch who doesn't want to work." In between doing a little work, she is on the phone with tennis buddies making plans or making travel plans. She takes several weeks vacation a year.
She also had the audacity to tell her supervisor when she worked over 36 hours a week, she expected comp time for it. I told her supervisor (CFO) that comp time is illegal and also brought to his attention her usual schedule in the office. This person has been here a long time and the supervisor apparently doesn't have enough of a backbone to address it with her.
I am sure this person will crash and burn eventually, but she is a thorn in the side of employee morale when people see her running through the parking lot in her little short shorts two hours a day while they are in the office working.
Don't let HR become the policeman here; this is a performance and compensation issue for the person/s responsible for making sure sufficient quality work is performed by the professional part-time employee for the compensation ageed upon by both parties. Just because the word part-time is somehow connected to this professional position does not related to the professional nature of the position and an EXEMPT STATUS OF THE POSITION! Pork
I have a senior manager who is reducing her schedule to 4 days per week. We are reducing her salary by a certain percentage and she has agreed to it (in fact, she is the one who is requesting this and is happy that we're agreeable). Am I wading into troubled waters at all with this? I worry that it starts to look like her compensation is based on the hours that she works...
>I have a senior manager who is reducing her schedule to 4 days per
>week. We are reducing her salary by a certain percentage and she has
>agreed to it (in fact, she is the one who is requesting this and is
>happy that we're agreeable). Am I wading into troubled waters at all
>with this? I worry that it starts to look like her compensation is
>based on the hours that she works...
No, this is perfectly acceptable. You should reduce her annual salary by a percentage, not on a "per hour" rate. Keep in mind that oftentimes, "exempt" employees who work a reduced schedule may occasionally have to work extra time to meet the parameters of their job. They are not entitled to extra compensation, just as a "full time" exempt individual is not entitled to overtime if they work in excess of 40 hours per week. This is the biggest problem with these type individuals - if they have to occasionally work a five day week, they feel, somehow, they should be compensated for it. Be careful not to fall into this trap.
Hope this answered your question.
When we put the hours in to payroll, should this manager be paid 40 hours per week - or 32?
The compensation will be the same regardless, but this could impact L&I (industrial insurance in Washington), and potentially other areas such as leave accrual.
Any advice?
“ . . . [T]he Division of Labor Standards Enforcement has determined that it is impermissible for an employer to reduce an exempt employee’s salary because of a reduction in the employee’s hours. A reduction in pay is lawful, however, if it is based on something other than a reduction in hours worked, such as reduced employer profitability, poor performance, or changed economic conditions.” (This from a San Francisco law firm.)
The notice goes on to suggest that reductions in pay and deductions from pay geared toward a part-time schedule are problematic for exempt employees because they are supposed to receive their salaries regardless of the quality or quantity of their work. In other words, DLSE frowns upon having exempt employees in part-time capacities and possibly even prohibits it.
This opinion may be subject to the usual game of semantics, and I don’t know how it works in practice. If you had two CA employees in exempt roles (and everything else about them is the same), it seems that it would be OK to pay one a lower salary than the other if the first works 32 hours a week while the second works 40 hours per week. Nonetheless, it may not be OK to reduce the pay of the 40-hour employee if his or her schedule is reduced to 32 hours a week. Go figure.
Hatchetman and others in CA may want to chime in, especially if they know for sure how this works out there. I’m in Texas, but our company has some CA employees, so we try to pay attention to CA rules occasionally.
Petard, I would also be interested in what other California employers have to say regarding part-time exempt status. I have never heard of it. As you pointed out, the amount of compensation cannot be subject to reduction because of variations in the quality or quanity of the work performed. In my position, there are times when I probably do not "work" a full 40 hour week, but there are also those weeks when I am working 50-60 hours. However, since my purpose is to support our stores, I am available from at least 8AM to 5PM. We also alternate carrying a pager 24/7 so that our stores will always have help when needed.
Elizabeth
In any case, presumably as a way to prevent employers from playing fast and loose with the regs, DLSE forwards the interpretation that salaried, exempt work is by definition full-time work. Someone who works part-time must be considered to be hourly—or at least nonexempt. That would explain why you can’t reduce an exempt employee’s pay solely because his or her schedule is reduced. I have no specific citation or precedent to illustrate this; it just seems to be DLSE’s logic.
I don’t know Forum’s rules for giving out vendors’ or law firms’ names, but if you e-mail me, San Francisco Elizabeth, I’ll give you the name of the law firm that sent us information on this topic.