Wage and Hour Case Studies - Today's DOL Violation Trends
September 28, 2022
Wage and Hour Case Studies - Today's DOL Violation Trends

The U.S. Department of Labor’s (DOL) Wage and Hour Division (WHD) is tasked with enforcing employment laws that affect more than 148 million workers. The WHD enforces federal minimum wage, overtime pay, recordkeeping and child labor requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), as well as the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) and a number of other employment standards and worker protections. According to the DOL, the core enforcement obligations of the WHD’s investigators include conducting investigations to determine if employers are paying workers and affording them their rights as required by law; helping ensure that law-abiding employers are not undercut by employers who violate the law; promoting compliance through outreach and public education initiatives; and supporting efforts to combat worker retaliation and worker misclassification as independent contractors. In fiscal year 2021, the WHD collected $230 million in wages owed to 190,000 workers, the DOL reported.


Generally, the WHD will initiate an investigation after a current or former employee files a complaint. A WHD investigator may visit an employer to provide information about the application of and compliance with the laws administered

by the WHD. An investigator may also visit an organization to conduct interviews, examine time clocks and ensure all employment notifications are available to employees. Additionally, they may review up to three years of wage and hour records to determine whether there are any violations in an employer’s payroll practices.


In addition to complaints, the WHD selects certain businesses and industries for investigation. For example, the WHD often targets low-wage industries due to high rates of violations, the employment of vulnerable workers or rapid industry changes, such as growth or decline. Occasionally, several organizations in a specific geographic area will be examined.


At the start of 2022, the DOL announced an initiative to hire 100 additional WHD investigators, signaling a potential increase in enforcement in 2022 and beyond. This initiative means now is the time for employers to review their wage and hour practices to ensure compliance with all relevant laws.


This article contains case studies that explore the most recent, real-world examples of employers found to be in violation of wage and hour laws. The case studies include snapshots of violations and general guidance on how employers can prevent similar issues. Employers can examine these case studies to learn from the mistakes of others in comparable industries and avoid costly consequences.


Real-world Case Studies


TAMPA, FL—A DOL investigation uncovered child labor violations by a fast-food restaurant franchisee. The franchisee had to pay more than $12,000 in civil monetary penalties.


What went wrong:

  • The organization allowed 17 employees who were minors—between ages 14 and 15—to work past 7 p.m.
  • The organization also allowed minor employees to work more than three hours during a school day when doing so was not permitted.


----------------       

ROCHESTER, NY—A DOL investigation found that a health care agency failed to pay its home health care aids overtime wages. The organization was forced to pay more than $228,000 in back wages for the 260 affected workers.


What went wrong:

  • Although the organization paid its health care aids overtime for hours worked over 44, it failed to pay workers time-and-a-half wages for hours between 40 and 44 they worked per week.


----------------       


NEW ORLEANS—A DOL investigation discovered that two contractors misclassified their painters and drywall workers as independent contractors. The organizations were forced to pay more than $246,000 in back wages for 306 workers.


What went wrong:

  • One organization misclassified its workers as independent contractors.
  • The same organization also failed to pay workers time-and-a-half overtime wages after they exceeded 40 hours in a workweek and instead used their regular rate of pay.
  • Both organizations failed to maintain complete and accurate records of the hours their employees worked.
  • The DOL determined that a joint employment relationship existed between the two organizations and, as a result, they were both liable to pay back wages.


 ----------------           

ATLANTA—A DOL investigation found that the Georgia Department of Public Health wrongly disciplined and terminated an employee for absences protected under the FMLA. The department was ordered to pay more than $77,000 in back wages and reinstate the employee.


What went wrong:

  • The department denied the employee’s request for leave for an FMLA-qualified condition.
  • The employee’s denial of FMLA benefits resulted in wrongful discipline and subsequent termination.


  ----------------   


Avoiding Violations

As illustrated by the case studies, avoiding wage and hour violations isn’t always easy. Due to the complex nature of employment laws, compliance is an ongoing challenge for employers. Reviewing these laws and regulations infrequently or only a handful of times is rarely sufficient, but by reviewing these laws regularly, employers can keep their businesses compliant and their workers satisfied. Below is general guidance related to the issues discussed earlier, categorized by violation type.


Child Labor Violations

Hiring minors comes with greater employer responsibilities, as minors have a number of specific wage and hour protections. Failing to comply with laws protecting this worker segment can be particularly costly.


The DOL recently publicized investigations uncovering child labor law violations. The WHD’s recent investigations of three grocery store operators in Idaho and Oregon resulted in more than $240,000 in civil penalties and $114,382 in unpaid overtime and liquidated damages for 266 employees. From 2017 to 2021, the DOL identified more than 4,000 cases of child labor law violations, finding more than 13,000 youth-aged workers employed in a violation.


In the Tampa, Florida, case study detailed in this article, minors were allowed to work later and more often than permitted by law. All of these instances are violations of the child labor provisions of the FLSA. Perhaps this was due to a shortage of workers, and only minors were available for specific positions and hours. Despite challenges in the current labor market, employers must remain compliant with all relevant state and federal laws governing child labor.


Employers should also consider regularly consulting with attorneys to ensure policies and practices are up to date and compliant.


Overtime Violations

The FLSA requires employers to pay covered nonexempt employees overtime wages—at a rate of time-and-a-half—if they exceed 40 hours in a workweek. Some companies utilize a variety of tactics to avoid paying these wages, including those that are unlawful.


In this article’s Rochester, New York, case study, the health care agency maintained and followed a practice in which home health care aids were paid straight time until they had worked more than 44 hours in a week. However, these employees were eligible for overtime pay once they had worked more than 40 hours. This case study demonstrates the importance of properly constructed and regularly reviewed workplace policies and manager training. Consulting with experts and having them review policies prior to their enforcement could save employers tens of thousands of dollars down the line. According to the DOL, employers may also contact the WHD to ensure they understand their responsibilities and avoid similar violations.


Employee Misclassification

One of the most serious problems facing employers is the misclassification of employees as independent contractors. Under the FLSA, employees are entitled to basic workplace protections that do not extend to independent contractors, such as minimum wage, overtime pay, protected FMLA leave, antidiscrimination and antiretaliation protections, workers’ compensation and unemployment insurance. The WHD is responsible for determining whether an employee has been misclassified as an independent contractor. Employers who misclassify workers may be forced to pay back wages, liquidated damages, attorneys’ fees and costs.


In the New Orleans, Louisiana, case study examined in this article, one contractor misclassified its workers as independent contractors. The workers were paid straight-time rates for all hours they worked. Because these workers were employees, they should have been paid time-and-a-half wages after they surpassed 40 hours in a workweek. Both contractors were also required to keep complete and accurate records of all hours their employees worked. This case reveals the importance of correctly classifying workers at the outset of the relationship and ensuring accurate and complete records are kept.


Sometimes it can be difficult to determine whether a worker is an employee or an independent contractor. However, seeking legal advice in these situations can help curtail potential violations and costly mistakes.


FMLA Violations

The FMLA protects workers who need to take a prolonged absence due to a qualified family or medical reason. This law was enacted so employees could deal with serious and potentially unexpected life circumstances without losing their jobs. Yet, an employee can follow all proper procedures, and an untrained or uninformed manager may still violate the law, resulting in costly consequences.


In this article’s Atlanta, Georgia, case study, the Georgia Department of Public Health wrongly denied the employee’s request for FMLA leave, believing the employee’s condition did not qualify for leave. As a result of the denied leave request, the employee was disciplined and subsequently terminated due to absences related to their FMLA-qualified condition. Employers must be aware of conditions that qualify for FMLA leave to avoid wrongfully disciplining or terminating otherwise protected employees.


FMLA violations can be particularly costly, as they may involve paying back employees’ lost wages and reinstating lost benefits. Employers need to ensure managers, employees and other stakeholders understand their FMLA rights. This includes knowing how to submit FMLA requests, understanding situations that might qualify for FMLA leave and comprehending workplace guarantees that come with this leave (e.g., job protection). Understanding these details can help prevent wrongful termination and significant monetary penalties.

 

Conclusion

These wage and hour violation case studies demonstrate how easy it can be for an employer to face challenges related to wage and hour regulations. That’s why it’s so important for employers to seek professional guidance before making potentially costly decisions. By learning from these employers’ mistakes, others in similar industries can avoid major violations and prevent DOL audits.

Sign up for our newsletter.

February 3, 2025
Overview of the New Ruling New York employers are once again required to provide a notice in their employee handbooks about reproductive health rights following a recent ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The ruling vacated a previous permanent injunction that had blocked the enforcement of the law, meaning employers must now comply with the New York Reproductive Health Bias Law (Labor Law § 203-e). Reproductive Health Bias Law Requirements The Reproductive Health Bias Law was enacted in November 2019 to ensure employees and their dependents can make reproductive health decisions without facing discrimination in the workplace. The law prohibits employers from taking retaliatory actions against employees regarding their reproductive health decisions and requires employers to keep employees' reproductive health information confidential unless there is prior written consent. Under the law, employers must include a notice in their employee handbooks informing employees of their rights and remedies under the Act. This is an essential update that must be made to comply with the law. Impact of the Second Circuit Ruling Religious organizations had challenged the law, arguing that the notice requirement violated their First Amendment rights. However, the Second Circuit disagreed, ruling that the notice requirement was lawful and similar to other workplace disclosure laws. The court noted that while the policy motivating the law may be controversial, the law itself and the obligation for employers to comply are not in question. Action Required for Employers Even though there is no specific penalty for failing to comply with the notice requirement, employers are encouraged to review and update their employee handbooks in light of the court's ruling to ensure they are compliant with the law. For Simco Clients: For clients who utilize Simco’s employee handbook services, rest assured this requirement is already included, and no additional steps are needed.
February 1, 2025
Pre-employment drug testing is a hiring practice that has sparked debate in recent years. While some industries rely on it for safety and compliance, others are rethinking its necessity—especially as marijuana laws evolve. If you're actively job searching, knowing what to expect can help you prepare, avoid surprises, and understand your rights. Who Still Requires Drug Testing? Not all industries conduct pre-employment drug testing, but for certain roles, it's still a non-negotiable requirement. Some of the most common sectors where testing remains standard include: Transportation & Public Safety – Truck drivers, pilots, transit operators, and law enforcement Healthcare & Childcare – Nurses, physicians, pharmacists, and daycare providers Government & Military Contracts – Federal employees, military personnel, and defense contractors Manufacturing & Construction – Heavy equipment operators and industrial workers handling hazardous materials However, policies vary widely even within these industries. Some companies are now loosening restrictions for non-safety-sensitive positions, recognizing that outdated drug testing policies may limit their talent pool. What Substances Are Typically Screened? Most pre-employment drug tests screen for common illicit substances, but the depth of testing can vary. Standard screenings include: Five-Panel Test – Detects marijuana, cocaine, amphetamines, opiates, and PCP Expanded Panel Tests – Can include benzodiazepines, barbiturates, synthetic opioids, and even alcohol Employers may use different types of tests, including urine, saliva, blood, or hair follicle analysis. Hair follicle testing, for example, can detect drug use from months prior—something applicants should be mindful of. The Evolving Landscape of Marijuana Testing One of the most significant changes in pre-employment drug testing involves marijuana. With over half of U.S. states legalizing marijuana in some form, companies are reevaluating their stance. Some states prohibit employers from disqualifying candidates for off-duty marijuana use. Other states still allow testing but require employers to prove impairment, not just presence. Federally regulated positions, such as those in transportation, maintain strict no-tolerance policies. This shift means that while some applicants may no longer face automatic disqualification for marijuana use, it’s still important to know an employer’s policy before assuming it won’t impact hiring decisions. What Happens If You Fail a Pre-Employment Drug Test? The consequences of failing a drug test depend on multiple factors, including company policy, industry regulations, and state laws. In regulated industries (e.g., transportation, healthcare, federal employment), a failed test almost always results in immediate disqualification. Some employers allow re-testing or a waiting period before reapplying, particularly for marijuana use in certain states. If you have a valid prescription for a tested substance (e.g., opioids or ADHD medication), you may need to provide documentation to avoid disqualification. Additionally, some companies offer assistance programs or second-chance policies, especially if an applicant is upfront about past use or addiction recovery. Do Employers Really Benefit from Drug Testing? With the workforce evolving, many companies are questioning whether traditional drug testing policies still serve their intended purpose. Some argue that testing reduces liability, improves workplace safety, and ensures reliable employees. However, others believe that outdated policies exclude qualified candidates, especially in a competitive job market. The Arguments for Drug Testing: Reduces workplace accidents in safety-sensitive roles Ensures compliance with federal and industry regulations Discourages drug use in high-responsibility positions The Arguments Against Drug Testing: May eliminate qualified candidates for non-safety-sensitive roles Does not account for impairment vs. past use (especially with marijuana) Can be costly and time-consuming for employers Companies that still require drug testing must weigh these factors and ensure their policies align with modern workforce expectations. The Future of Pre-Employment Drug Testing The debate over drug testing isn’t going away anytime soon. As laws and attitudes continue shifting, companies may move toward impairment-based testing rather than zero-tolerance screening. This means job seekers should stay informed, especially in industries where testing is likely to remain a requirement. For now, the best approach is to understand employer expectations, know your legal protections, and be prepared for potential screenings as part of the hiring process.
January 30, 2025
Workplace Posting for Form 300A Begins February 1 Employers with 11 or more employees at any point in 2024 must display the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Form 300A, Summary of Work-Related Injuries and Illnesses, from February 1 to April 30. Even if no recordable incidents occurred in 2024, this posting is mandatory. The form must be certified by a company executive and displayed prominently in each workplace where employee notices are typically posted. Certain businesses are exempt from OSHA’s regular recordkeeping requirements, including this posting, if they employ 10 or fewer people or if their primary business activity is considered low hazard according to OSHA's guidelines. A full list of low-hazard industries, categorized by NAICS codes, is available here . However, even exempt companies must report fatalities or incidents resulting in hospitalization, amputation, or loss of an eye. Electronic Submission of Form 300A Due by March 2 Businesses with 250 or more employees from the previous year, or those with 20-249 employees in high-risk industries, must submit their Form 300A data electronically through OSHA's Injury Tracking Application (ITA) by March 2, 2025. This requirement applies based on the number of employees at a specific location, not the entire company. Employers under State Plans are also required to submit electronically. Exemptions from this electronic submission apply to employers who: Are exempt from OSHA's regular recordkeeping rules. Had fewer than 20 employees in the past year. Had between 20 and 249 employees but aren’t in the designated high-risk industries. Additional resources, FAQs, and access to the ITA are available on OSHA’s ITA page . Submission of Forms 300 and 301 Required by March 2 Employers in high-hazard industries with 100 or more employees are required to submit data from both their Form 300 (Log of Work-Related Injuries and Illnesses) and Form 301 (Injury and Illness Incident Report) through the ITA, in addition to their Form 300A submission. Help with Coverage Determination Employers can use OSHA’s ITA Coverage Application to assess whether they need to submit injury and illness data electronically or refer to the State Plan for specific reporting requirements.

Have a question? Get in touch.

Share by: