Search form

Oregon Clarifies, Overhauls Manufacturing Overtime Rules

By Mark A. Crabtree and April Upchurch Fredrickson
  • August 10, 2017

Oregon Governor Kate Brown has signed into law a bill that remedies ambiguities in Oregon’s decades-old daily overtime law, which covers non-union employees working in mills, factories, and manufacturing establishments.

H.B. 3458 rejects an Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries interpretation concerning the pyramiding of overtime entitlements. The new law clarifies that employees who are entitled to receive both daily and weekly overtime must be paid only the greater of the two, rather than both.

The new law also sets new limits on weekly work hours, while providing certain employers a new undue hardship exemption.

Finally, the H.B. 3458 adds new enforcement provisions.

Background

Oregon employers with operations in mills, factories, and manufacturing establishments have been required to pay employees daily overtime after 10 hours of work. Existing law also caps daily work hours in mills, factories, and manufacturing establishments at 13 hours. Non-exempt employees, of course, also are entitled to overtime compensation under state and federal law for work beyond 40 hours per week.

Before 2016, the Bureau of Labor and Industries (BOLI) interpreted the respective overtime rules to require employers to pay only the greater of daily or weekly overtime in a workweek, not both. However, in December 2016, BOLI revised its interpretation and opined that employers must pay both daily and weekly overtime, even if an employee is compensated twice for the same hours worked.

While at least one Oregon trial court has rejected BOLI’s new interpretation, it was unclear whether BOLI’s enforcement policies would reflect its new interpretation.

New Law

H.B. 3458, which was championed by business groups, rejects BOLI’s interpretation and clarifies any ambiguity. It expressly provides that employers should calculate an employee’s overtime calculation on both a daily and weekly basis and pay the greater of the two. The clarifying language becomes effective immediately on passage.

In addition, the new law revises limits on weekly work hours for those employed in mills, factories, or other manufacturing establishments. Absent an undue hardship, employers may not require or permit employees to work more than 55 hours a week. However, employees may request or consent in writing to work up to 60 hours a week.

The new law makes it an unlawful employment practice to discipline employees for declining to consent to work in excess of 55 hours a week.

Under the new undue hardship exemption, employers that process perishable products may permit employees to consent to work up to 84 hours a week, with certain limitations.
 
Addressing further ambiguities in the existing law, H.B. 3458 provides a private right of action in favor of employees for violations of the daily and weekly caps on work hours. Employees claiming they were required or coerced to work beyond 13 hours in a day, or 55 hours in a week, may recover $3,000 for each violation, plus liquidated damages equal to twice the employee’s overtime wages earned during the period of non-compliance. In addition, the bill reaffirms BOLI’s authorization to assess civil penalties against non-compliant employers.

The new weekly hours cap and new private right of action will become effective January 1, 2018.

***

To ensure compliance with these new developments, employers should review and update their existing compensation policies and scheduling practices.

Please contact Jackson Lewis with any questions about these developments, compliance, or related matters.

©2017 Jackson Lewis P.C. This Update is provided for informational purposes only. It is not intended as legal advice nor does it create an attorney/client relationship between Jackson Lewis and any readers or recipients. Readers should consult counsel of their own choosing to discuss how these matters relate to their individual circumstances. Reproduction in whole or in part is prohibited without the express written consent of Jackson Lewis.

This Update may be considered attorney advertising in some states. Furthermore, prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Jackson Lewis P.C. represents management exclusively in workplace law and related litigation. Our attorneys are available to assist employers in their compliance efforts and to represent employers in matters before state and federal courts and administrative agencies. For more information, please contact the attorney(s) listed or the Jackson Lewis attorney with whom you regularly work.

See AllRelated Articles You May Like

August 9, 2017

Oregon Becomes First State in Nation to Enact Scheduling Legislation

August 9, 2017

Oregon has become the first U.S. state to regulate employer scheduling practices in the food service, hospitality, and retail industries. The new law, S.B. 828, will take effect July 1, 2018. Signed by Governor Kate Brown on August 8, 2017, the new law follows similar measures enacted in such cities as New York, Seattle, and San... Read More

August 8, 2017

New York City Adopts New ‘Ban the Box’ Regulations, Continues Expansion of Employee Rights

August 8, 2017

Although New York City’s “ban the box” law, the Fair Chance Act (“FCA”), went into effect close to two years ago, the New York City Commission on Human Rights’ final regulations became effective on August 5, 2017. These regulations expand on the previously issued Enforcement Guidance (New York City Issues Enforcement Guidance Related to... Read More

August 7, 2017

City of Chicago Not Liable for Police Officers’ After-Hours Smartphone Use, Seventh Circuit Affirms

August 7, 2017

The City of Chicago lacked either actual or constructive knowledge that members of the Chicago Police Department were performing after-hours work on their smartphones, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled, affirming a trial court’s earlier ruling that the City was not liable for this work under the Fair Labor Standards Act.... Read More

Related Practices