Search form

Non-Agricultural Employers May Use Workweek Averaging to Satisfy State Minimum Wage Obligations in Washington

By Peter H. Nohle
  • September 9, 2019

The Washington Supreme Court has confirmed that non-agricultural employers may use a workweek averaging methodology to satisfy the Washington Minimum Wage Act. Sampson et al. v. Knight Transportation Inc. et al., No. 96264-2 (Sept. 5, 2019). In other words, non-agricultural employers can satisfy their state minimum wage obligations by showing that an employee’s total wages for a workweek, when divided by the total hours worked during that week, results in a figure that is equal to or greater than the state minimum wage.

Workweek averaging is a well-accepted concept as a matter of federal law. It also had been a long-accepted practice in Washington in both the agricultural and non-agricultural contexts. However, an employer’s ability to use that methodology to satisfy its minimum wage obligation in a non-agricultural setting was recently thrown into question as a result of the Washington Supreme Court opinion in Carranza v. Dovex Fruit Co., 190 Wn.2d 612 (2018). In Carranza, the Court held that workweek averaging was not permitted in an agricultural setting. Instead, the Court ruled that employers must pay their employees at least the minimum wage for each hour worked. This meant that employers who paid their employees on a piece rate basis, for example, by the amount of fruit that was picked, had to separately and hourly pay their employees for work that was not directly related to the picking of fruit (e.g., traveling between orchards, attending meetings, and storing and maintaining equipment and materials).

In Sampson, the Court considered a certified question from the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington: “Does the Washington Minimum Wage Act require non-agricultural employers to pay their piece-rate employees per hour for time spent performing activities outside of piece-rate work?” Essentially, the Court was tasked with determining whether the rule established by Carranza in an agricultural setting would be applied to non-agricultural employers. In a 6-3 decision, the Sampson Court responded in the negative, and affirmed the validity of workweek averaging as set forth in WAC 296-126-021.

While Sampson arose in a transportation context — involving truck drivers who were paid by the mile — its application extends well beyond the specifics of that industry and provides relief to all non-agricultural employers who pay their employees on a piece rate or commission basis.


©2019 Jackson Lewis P.C. This material is provided for informational purposes only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice nor does it create a client-lawyer relationship between Jackson Lewis and any recipient. Recipients should consult with counsel before taking any actions based on the information contained within this material. This material may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Reproduction of this material in whole or in part is prohibited without the express prior written consent of Jackson Lewis P.C., a law firm that built its reputation on providing workplace law representation to management. Founded in 1958, the firm has grown to more than 900 attorneys in major cities nationwide serving clients across a wide range of practices and industries including government relations, healthcare and sports law. More information about Jackson Lewis can be found at

See AllRelated Articles You May Like

November 6, 2019

Labor Department Proposes Changes to Clarify Use of FLSA’s ‘Fluctuating Workweek’ Pay Method

November 6, 2019

Persistent confusion over the Department of Labor’s (DOL) “fluctuating workweek” (FWW) pay method to satisfy employers’ obligation to pay overtime has deterred many from using it. Now, the DOL has proposed changes to clarify the pay method. Under DOL regulations on the FWW pay method, if certain conditions are met, an employer may pay... Read More

October 25, 2019

Election Day is Coming – What are Your Obligations as an Employer?

October 25, 2019

With Election Day fast approaching, employers should ensure they are in compliance with state law requirements related to employee voting rights. While not all states impose requirements on employers, some impose time off obligations and notice requirements with the possibility of criminal or civil penalties for non-compliance.... Read More

October 8, 2019

DOL Proposes FLSA Regulations to Close Door on ‘80/20’ Rule, Implement Tip Pooling Amendments

October 8, 2019

The Department of Labor (DOL) published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) on October 8, 2019, to eliminate the “20% Rule,” or “80/20 Rule,” under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The 20% Rule, which first appeared in a DOL Field Operations Handbook (FOH) in 1988, requires employers to pay tipped employees the full minimum... Read More

Related Practices