Answers to tricky HR questions: Do we have to pay employees for jury duty?
June 13, 2008 by Jim GiulianoPosted in: Answers to tricky HR questions, Exempt non-exempt, In this week's e-newsletter, Latest News & Views, Money, Pay, policies
Our team of experts fields real-life, everyday questions from HR managers and gives practical answers that can be applied by any HR pro in the same situation. Today’s question: What are the rules for paying employees who are on jury duty?
Question
Do we have to pay employees who are on jury duty? Should they get full pay for the whole time they serve?
Answer
Let’s begin the answer by talking about exempt employees, explains Jane Dalton, an employment-law attorney with Duane Morris LLP.
The FLSA says any exempt employee who works part of a week and spends another part of the week on jury duty must be paid for the full week.
For all other employees and for exempts who spend at least a full week on jury duty, the law varies from state to state.
Some say employees must be paid for a minimum number of days. Most states permit the employer to deduct from pay any amount the employee receives for serving on jury duty.
Check with your state department of labor to learn the limits and requirements in your state.
Tags: duane morris, exempt, jury duty, Pay
Loading ...
June 16th, 2008 at 12:07 pm
Would you happen to know the state of California requirements?
June 16th, 2008 at 2:07 pm
We are a Florida business and called the The Fed. Dept. of Labor on this exact issue. They said call the state. I called the State of Florida Dept .of Labor and they said call the County.
I just paid the non-exempt dude his 8 hours. That was enough for me.
June 16th, 2008 at 2:55 pm
California follows the Federal law, you are not required to pay a non exempt employee for hours not worked. You do not have to pay for an employee serving on a jury but you cannot prevent them from serving or discriminate against them for doing it.
June 16th, 2008 at 3:13 pm
I’ve read two articles in the last few weeks that indicate employers are required to pay exempt employees for jury duty, however, I looked up this issue and the US DOL website and it says the FLSA not require payment for jury duty. Can you tell me where I can find the inforamtion you’ve found that indicates federal law requires us to pay them?
The US DOL website address I found the above info at is:
http://www.dol.gov/dol/topic/benefits-leave/juryduty.htm
June 16th, 2008 at 7:48 pm
Sherry, the DOL statement at the link you provided is referring to nonexempt employees (i.e., ees not subject to a “salary basis” test in order to qualify for exemption). If your reference to “exempt” employees means those who must be paid on a salary basis, such as executives or, in most cases, administrative and/or professional ees, reducing or deducting from the salary because of jury duty is not permitted and will cause loss of exemption. The relevant regulation is 29 CFR Part 541, Section 541.602 http://www.dol.gov/dol/allcfr/ESA/Title_29/Part_541/29CFR541.602.htm Here is an excerpt:
(3) While an employer cannot make deductions from pay for absences
of an exempt employee occasioned by jury duty, attendance as a witness
or temporary military leave, the employer can offset any amounts
received by an employee as jury fees, witness fees or military pay for
a particular week against the salary due for that particular week
without loss of the exemption.
As with any other absence of a salaried exempt employee, you may charge a leave or PTO bank. Also, as was initially pointed out at the beginning of this thread, if a salaried ee does not work at all during a workweek the regulation does not require that the weekly equivalent of the salary be paid, but do not confuse the workweek with the calendar week (they may be the same, but typically they are not).
June 30th, 2008 at 10:43 am
It is my understanding that it is okay to charge an exempt employees paid leave bank for jury duty. However, if that exempt has exhausted hours in a leave bank, a company must still pay the employee for jury duty and cannot make deductions from a exempt employee’s pay for absences due to jury duty in a workweek.
July 24th, 2008 at 7:21 pm
Hello,
I was wondering if anyone is working/has worked in the state of Florida who can answer this question.
Can you pay a “car mechanic” in a car dealership setting, commission only in Florida?
The quesion arose that this person gets paid commission only for actual hours worked, which are far less than hours actually at work (many hours are spent waiting around for car repair work to come by, which in a slow economy is even less). He gets a W-2 and his benefits require at least 30 hours worked per week(which means he is classified as an employee), which he is unable to make due to the slowing economy. He actually is present at his work site atleast 8 hours a day but doesn’t receive any hourly pay.
Does this seem normal? Any input or references will be appreciated.
Thanks,
CB
August 7th, 2008 at 4:34 pm
CB,
You can structure the pay any way you wish as long as the total pay divided by the hours worked meets or exceeds the min wage. (USDOL Vs Carolina Glove). Also, the total pay must be divided by the hours work to determine a rate to be paid at 150% if the hours work exceed 40 in a week.
August 11th, 2008 at 11:21 am
How can I find Massachusetts law pertaining to this question?
Thank you.
August 11th, 2008 at 12:29 pm
Thanks for clarifying this.
But I still don’t understand that how can you explain having an employee come in for 8 hours a day, 5 days a week then and pay them for just 2-3 hours when they perform work as it comes in ?
Thanks,
Charu
September 15th, 2008 at 12:25 am
Some noted above that for exempt employees… “As with any other absence of a salaried exempt employee, you may charge a leave or PTO bank.”
I’d like to see where this is documented. Charging a leave or deducting from PTO would appear to be taking away earned benefits. If one is assumed to be on the job if one works at all during a particular workweek, how can a deduction of earned benefits be justified? Can anyone document an interpretation either way?