[21-984] Helix Energy Solutions Group, Inc. v. Hewitt

Helix Energy Solutions Group, Inc. v. Hewitt

Wikipedia · Justia (with opinion) · Docket · oyez.org

Argued on Oct 12, 2022.
Decided on Feb 22, 2023.

Petitioner: Helix Energy Solutions, et al..
Respondent: Michael J. Hewitt.

Advocates:

• Paul D. Clement (for the Petitioners)
• Edwin Sullivan (for the Respondent)
• Anthony A. Yang (for the United States, as amicus curiae, supporting the Respondent)

Facts of the case (from oyez.org)

Michael J. Hewitt worked on an offshore oil rig managing other employees. His employer, Helix Energy Solutions Group, Inc., paid Hewitt based solely on a daily rate, and he often was required to work well over forty hours per week.

Hewitt sued Helix for overtime pay under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). Helix argued that it was not required to pay Hewitt overtime because Hewitt was a “highly compensated employee,” and highly compensated employees are exempt from overtime pay. Hewitt argued that because his pay was calculated on a daily rate, he was not paid on a salary basis and thus was entitled to overtime pay regardless of the dollar amount he was paid.

The district court ruled for Helix, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed. 

Question

Is a supervisor who makes over $200,000 annually, calculated on a daily basis, entitled to overtime pay, despite a regulation that carves out an exception for highly paid executives?

Conclusion

Daily-rate workers, of whatever income level, qualify as paid on a salary basis only if they satisfy the three conditions outlined in the Fair Labor Standards Act. Justice Elena Kagan authored the 6-3 majority opinion of the Court holding that Hewitt was not an executive exempt from the FLSA’s overtime pay guarantee.

Under the FLSA, an employee is considered a bona fide executive excluded from the FLSA’s protections if the employee meets three tests: (1) the salary basis test, which requires that the employee receive a predetermined and fixed salary that does not vary with the amount of time worked; (2) the “salary level” test, which requires the preset salary to exceed a specified amount; and (3) the job “duties” test, which considers whether the employee has responsibility for managing the enterprise, directing other employees, and hiring and firing other employees. It was undisputed that Hewitt satisfied (2) and (3); at issue was whether he was paid on a salary basis.

Under Section 602(a), an employee is paid on a salary basis if they regularly receive each pay period on a weekly or less frequent basis. Under the plain meaning of that provision, it does not apply to daily-rate workers. Hewitt’s pay, in contrast, was determined on a daily basis, despite receiving paychecks every two weeks. Because he did not satisfy the first part of the test, he was not an exempt executive within the FLSA and was thus entitled to overtime pay.

Justice Neil Gorsuch authored a dissenting opinion, arguing that the case should have been dismissed as improvidently granted because the issue originally presented was different from the issue argued and addressed.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh authored a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Samuel Alito joined, arguing that Hewitt was a bona fide executive based on his salary level and duties, and the fact that he was certain to make at least $963 per week for any week he worked.