Category Archives: Whole Grind-Whole Life

Professional Wellness Month is celebrated each year in June and it throws light on the workplace’s role in creating a holistic environment for employees. It also focuses on how organizations that place emphasis on professional wellness are largely successful, attract top talent, and drive employee retention.

I ask my readers to reject the assumptions and the criteria described by the Fair Labor Standards Act as they contribute to Unequal Employment Opportunities at the American Workplace. As such the Fair Labor Standards Act is not consistent with the Natural Law principle of Equality that formulates the Supreme Law of this Land.

Cultivating a Healthier, Happier Workplace

Despite the vast advantages of a healthy workplace culture, new insights from Gallup show that only about a quarter of U.S. employees strongly agree that their organization delivers on its mission and promises, say that they can apply their organization’s values to their work, and actually believe in those values. This once again goes back to the employer-employee disconnect driving attrition and toxic workplace environments: When leaders attempt to unite their workplace around a common goal, value, or mission without taking into proper account the needs, concerns, or values of their employees, such efforts ultimately fail.

Instead, the cultivation of a healthy, harmonious workplace culture happens only when everyone in the organization is involved, and not just those at the top. That said, some of the best practices that can help organizations to improve their environment and enhance their workplace culture include those listed below.

Incorporating Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion into Daily Operations

First and foremost, building a healthy work environment and a strong culture requires that organizations reimagine what diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in the workplace looks like (or the alternative acronym, EDI). Without ensuring that discriminatory, oppressive, or limiting policies, practices, and biases are absent or disbarred from the workplace (i.e. without ensuring that the workplace is equitable), toxicity in the workplace will prevail, as will its numerous costs and consequences.

That said, employers need to look beyond diversity recruitment and pivot their focus toward creating a sustainable environment that treats all employees as equals, helps them to reach their full potential, and motivates them to stay. This may include ensuring that all groups present in the workplace (namely, all ages, genders, races, ethnicities, etc.) are accounted and spoken for before any important decision is made, that everyone has a chance to be heard during meetings, that everyone has the same opportunities for growth and promotion within the organization, and that everyone is treated with the same level of respect.

Providing Training Opportunities for Leaders and Managers

While healthy workplace cultures revolve around the equitable treatment and involvement of all members of an organization, establishing that workplace culture starts at the top. How leaders communicate, behave, and defend or explain their behaviors in the workplace inevitably influences employee behavior, sentiment, and their experience at large. That said, many experts on corporate culture underscore the importance of providing training opportunities to teach leaders from all levels of the organization about the signs and characteristics of toxic workplace cultures, the role they play in determining workplace culture, and how they can prevent toxic cultures and, alternatively, foster positive cultures. This includes encouraging leaders to seek out cross-cultural experiences that help them to enhance their awareness of other cultures and really connect with the needs, interests, and values of their employees; allowing them the time and opportunity to help them build key skills, like empathy, active listening, and recognition; and organizing workshops dedicated to teaching leaders how they can be supportive of employees’ workplace mental health and wellbeing needs, and be accommodating toward their personal and professional goals.

Offering Educational and Professional Development Opportunities

As leaders are trained to be more empathic, inclusive, and accommodating. One of the best ways in which they can show support to their workforce, according to employees, is by offering career-enhancing education and continual development opportunities that tie them to their organization’s key missions or purpose, reassures them that their work and talents matter and are valued, and motivates them to look for new and improved ways of contributing to their organization. Research shows that employees who feel as though their employer not only values their work but cares about their long-term career prospects and individual success are likely to feel happier and more secure, creating a culture of celebration instead of cutthroat competition. Some of the most sought-after professional development opportunities include management and leadership training, certification programs, technical and interpersonal skills training, and employer-subsidized degree programs. By incorporating development opportunities into daily operations, leaders establish an equitable and inclusive culture in which all believe they have the potential to rise to the top, regardless of connections, backgrounds, or other unfair advantages that, when advantageous, perpetuate toxic cultures.

Prioritizing Holistic Wellbeing; Implementing Wellness Programs and Flexible Benefits

When employees feel as though their leaders look down on their health and wellness needs as a detriment or burden to the organization, they are more likely to feel detached from their leaders and peers, disinterested in their work, and overall, less committed to their roles and employment with the organization. In fact, a new study has found that the majority of today’s workforce (86 percent) would be more likely to leave a job if it did not support their wellbeing, while 83 percent say they are more attracted to organizations that demonstrate a “progressive culture” that cares about workers’ holistic health and wellbeing. In order to create such a culture, numerous studies point to the importance of maintaining workers’ work-life balance and upholding their “right to disconnect”; prioritizing flexibility and autonomy when designing benefits offerings, such as by offering work-from-home and choose-your-own-hours opportunities, unlimited paid time off (PTO), as well as health and wellness stipends; and incorporating stress-reduction, mindfulness, and meditation practices into the workday. When employees are given the okay to relax, recharge, and recover, they’re protected against chronic or excessive stress, which not only improves their performance, but also improves their mood, which in turn creates a happier, more cooperative, and good-natured culture.

The Hourly vs the Salaried Employees. The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) is fundamentally flawed

The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) was signed into law on June 25, 1938 claiming that it will provide protection to people working in the US.

In my analysis, FLSA is fundamentally flawed for it divides workers into categories such as “White Collar” and “Blue Collar” without understanding the basis for the man’s existence in the natural world.

There can be no distinction such as the Skilled and Unskilled among the workers as Life can only be defined as ‘Knowledge in Action’. All human beings process similar kind of information and use chemical energy to perform similar kinds of sequential, guided, purposeful and goal-oriented actions described as ‘Metabolism’. In fact, no man can perform Unskilled work.

I ask the US Congress and The US Department of Labor to discard the flawed Act and dump into the dustbin to put an end to the division of workers into White and Blue Collar. As such, each employee and his or her employer must make the determination about compensation or remuneration and agree upon the terms for wages and benefits for performing any kind of labor.

In my view, the Natural Sciences and the Medical Science in particular does not validate the concept of the White-Collar or the Managerial Class as no human being performs executive, administrative, or professional service while operating the metabolic functions of human bodies of their own. No man lives as the boss, the manager, the administrator, the executive officer, the ruler, the governor, or the controller of his own body.

I ask my readers to reject the assumptions and the criteria described by the Fair Labor Standards Act as they contribute to Unequal Employment Opportunities at the American Workplace. As such the Fair Labor Standards Act is not consistent with the Natural Law principle of Equality that formulates the Supreme Law of this Land.

Rudra Narasimham Rebbapragada

SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE-ESTABLISHMENT NO. 22-VIKAS REGIMENT

FACT SHEET – WAGE AND HOUR DIVISION (WHD) – U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Clipped from: https://www.dol.gov/whd/overtime/whdfs17s.htm

Fact Sheet #17S: Higher Education Institutions and Overtime Pay Under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)

The FLSA requires that a non-exempt employee receive minimum wages for his or her work, as well as overtime wages whenever he or she works more than 40 hours in a workweek. Section 13(a)(1) of the FLSA, however, exempts certain employees who perform bona fide executive, administrative, professional, and outside sales duties from minimum wage and overtime requirements. These exemptions are often called the “white-collar” exemptions. This fact sheet discusses the applicability of these exemptions to jobs that are common in higher education institutions.

General Requirements for Exemptions

To qualify for a white collar exemption, an employee must generally satisfy three tests:

1. The employee must be paid on a salary basis that is not subject to reduction based on the quality or quantity of work (the “salary basis test”), rather than, for example, on an hourly basis;

2. The employee must receive a salary at a rate not less than $455* per week (the “salary level test”); and

3. The employee’s primary duty must involve the kind of work associated with the exempt status sought, such as executive, administrative, or professional work (the “duties test”).

4. Additional information concerning these exemptions is available in Fact Sheets 17A-G. See https://www.dol.gov/whd/regs/compliance/whdcomp.htm.

Exemptions for Common Higher Education Jobs

Teachers

A teacher is exempt if his or her primary duty is teaching, tutoring, instructing, or lecturing to impart knowledge, and if he or she is performing that duty as an employee of an educational establishment. See 29 C.F.R. § 541.303. Educational establishments include elementary school systems, secondary school systems, institutions of higher education, and other educational institutions. See 29 C.F.R. § 541.204(b). If a bona fide teacher meets this duty requirement, the salary level and salary basis tests do not apply. See 29 C.F.R. §§ 541.303(d), 541.600(e). Given these standards, professors, instructors, and adjunct professors typically qualify for this exemption.

A faculty member who teaches online or remotely also may qualify for this exemption. The regulations do not restrict where bona fide teaching may take place, to whom the knowledge can be imparted, or how many hours a teacher must work per week to qualify for the exemption. The exemption would therefore ordinarily apply, for example, to a part-time faculty member of an educational establishment whose primary duty is to provide instruction through online courses to remote non-credit learners. The exemption could likewise apply, for example, to an agricultural extension agent who is employed by an educational establishment to travel and provide instruction to farmers, if the agent’s primary duty is teaching, instructing, or lecturing to impart knowledge. To determine a teacher’s primary duty, the relevant inquiry in all cases is the teacher’s actual job duties. Job titles or full/part-time status alone do not determine exempt status.

A teacher does not become non-exempt merely because he or she spends a considerable amount of time in extracurricular activities (such as coaching athletic teams or supervising student clubs), provided the teacher’s primary duty is teaching.

Coaches

Athletic coaches employed by higher education institutions may qualify for the teacher exemption. After all, teaching may include instructing student-athletes in how to perform their sport. But a coach will not qualify for the exemption if his or her primary duties are recruiting students to play sports or visiting high schools and athletic camps to conduct student interviews. The amount of time the coach spends instructing student-athletes in a team sport is relevant, but not the exclusive factor, in determining the coach’s exempt status.

Professional Employees

The FLSA provides for several kinds of exempt professional employees—such as learned professionals, creative professionals, teachers, and employees practicing law or medicine. In higher education, employees eligible for the professional exemption are often either teachers (as discussed above) or learned professionals (as described below). To qualify as a learned professional, the employee must satisfy three requirements:

1. The employee’s primary duty must be the performance of work requiring advanced knowledge;

2. The advanced knowledge must be in a field of science or learning; and

3. The advanced knowledge must be customarily acquired by a prolonged course of specialized intellectual instruction.

See 29 C.F.R. § 541.301. Unless the employee is a teacher or practicing law or medicine, he or she must also satisfy the above-referenced salary basis and salary level tests to be an exempt professional.

In higher education, examples of exempt non-teacher learned professionals generally include certified public accountants, psychologists, certified athletic trainers, and librarians. Postdoctoral fellows, who conduct research at a higher education institution after completing their doctoral studies, likewise generally meet the duties requirements of the learned professional exemption, and they may additionally qualify for the teacher exemption if teaching is their primary duty. Of course, an employee’s qualification for the exemption depends on his or her actual job duties and education. Job titles alone are not sufficient for determining whether an employee satisfies the duties test.

Administrative Employees

Various employees at higher educational institutions may qualify as exempt administrative employees. The administrative exemption applies when the following requirements are met:

1. The employee’s compensation must satisfy the above-referenced salary basis and salary level tests;

2. The employee’s primary duty must be the performance of office or non-manual work directly related to the management or general business operations of the employer or the employer’s customers; and

3. The employee’s primary duty must include the exercise of discretion and independent judgment with respect to matters of significance.

See 29 C.F.R. § 541.200. Such administrative employees in higher education might include, for example, admissions counselors or student financial aid officers. An employee’s qualification for the exemption depends on his or her actual job duties; job titles alone are not sufficient for determining whether an employee satisfies the duties test.

Notably, there are specific regulatory provisions for certain administrative employees—known as “academic administrative employees”—whose primary duty is performing administrative functions directly related to academic instruction or training in an educational establishment. To be exempt as an academic administrative professional:

1. The employee must satisfy the above-referenced salary basis and salary level tests or receive a salary of at least the entrance salary for teachers in the same educational establishment; and

2. The employee’s primary duty must be to perform administrative functions directly related to academic instruction or training in an educational establishment.

See 29 C.F.R. § 541.204. Employees who work in higher education but whose work does not relate to the educational field (such as work in general business operations) do not qualify as exempt academic administrative employees. See id.

In higher education institutions, exempt academic administrative personnel generally include department heads, intervention specialists who are available to respond to student academic issues, and other employees with similar responsibilities. Exempt administrative personnel would likewise generally include academic counselors who administer school testing programs, assist students with academic problems, and advise students concerning degree requirements. Again, whether an employee satisfies the duties test for these exemptions depends on the employee’s actual job duties, not just the employee’s job title.

Executive Employees

To qualify for the executive exemption, an employee must satisfy the following tests:

1. The employee must receive compensation that satisfies the above-referenced salary basis and salary level tests;

2. The employee’s primary duty must be managing the enterprise or a customarily recognized department or subdivision thereof;

3. The employee must customarily and regularly direct the work of at least two or more other full-time employees or their equivalent (for example, one full-time and two half-time employees); and

4. The employee must have the authority to hire or fire other employees, or in the alternative, the employee’s suggestions and recommendations as to the hiring, firing, advancement, promotion, or any other change of status of other employees must be given particular weight.

See 29 C.F.R. § 541.100. Various positions in higher education institutions might qualify for the executive exemption, including deans, department heads, directors, and any other manager or supervisor whose job duties and compensation satisfy the above criteria.

Student-Employees

As a general matter, most students who work for their college or university are hourly non-exempt workers and do not work more than 40 hours per week. The following, however, are examples of students who often receive a salary or other non-hourly compensation:

· Graduate Teaching Assistants. Graduate teaching assistants whose primary duty is teaching are exempt. Because they qualify for the teacher exemption, they are not subject to the salary basis and salary level tests.

· Research Assistants. Generally, an educational relationship exists when a graduate or undergraduate student performs research under a faculty member’s supervision while obtaining a degree. Under these circumstances, the Department would not assert that an employment relationship exists with either the school or any grantor funding the student’s research. This is true even though the student may receive a stipend for performing the research.

· Student Residential Assistants. Students enrolled in bona fide educational programs who are residential assistants and receive reduced room or board charges or tuition credits are not generally considered employees under the FLSA. They therefore are not entitled to minimum wages and overtime under the FLSA.

An employment relationship will generally exist when a student receives compensation and his or her duties are not part of an overall education program. For example, students who work at food service counters, sell programs or usher at events, or wash dishes in dining halls and anticipate some compensation (for example, money or meals) are generally considered employees entitled to minimum wage and overtime compensation.

Compensatory Time at Public Universities

Public universities or colleges that qualify as a “public agency” under the FLSA may compensate non-exempt employees with compensatory time off (or “comp time”) in lieu of overtime pay. A college or university is a public agency under the FLSA if it is a political subdivision of a State. When determining whether a college or university is a “political subdivision,” the Department considers whether (1) the State directly created the entity, or (2) individuals administering the entity are responsible to public officials or the general electorate.

If the public university or college qualifies as a public agency, non-exempt employees generally may not accrue more than 240 hours of comp time. However, employees engaged to work in a public safety activity, an emergency response activity, or a seasonal activity may accrue as much as 480 hours of comp time. See 29 U.S.C. 207(o)(3)(A). Private higher education institutions may not pay employees comp time in lieu of overtime pay.

Where to Obtain Additional Information

This publication is for general information and is not a regulation. For additional information, visit our Wage and Hour Division Website: http://www.wagehour.dol.gov and/or call our toll-free information and helpline, available 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. in your time zone at: 1-866-4USWAGE (1-866-487-9243).

Note (added January 2018): *

The Department of Labor is undertaking rulemaking to revise the regulations located at 29 C.F.R. part 541, which govern the exemption of executive, administrative, and professional employees from the Fair Labor Standards Act’s minimum wage and overtime pay requirements. Until the Department issues its final rule, it will enforce the part 541 regulations in effect on November 30, 2016, including the $455 per week standard salary level. These regulations are available at: https://www.dol.gov/whd/overtime/regulations.pdf.