Today, the Circuit Court for the City of St. Louis, Missouri lifted an injunction that had blocked a St. Louis City ordinance increasing the minimum wage for St. Louis City businesses. This action came after the Missouri Supreme Court ruled that state law did not prohibit the higher local minimum wage.
On October 14, 2015, a St. Louis judge declared the city’s planned minimum wage increase invalid because it conflicts with the state minimum wage, currently set at $7.65 per hour. In August, the City of St. Louis passed an ordinance that would have eventually raised the minimum wage to $11.00 per hour by 2018. The first increase to $8.25 per hour was set to take effect on October 15, 2015.
The DOL Announces Guidance on Wage and Hour Misclassification – Employees vs Independent Contractors
The Department of Labor recently released new guidance (Administrator’s Interpretation No. 2015-1) on how it will decide whether a worker is properly classified as an employee or an independent contractor. Although the factors discussed in the Administrator’s Interpretation are not new, the DOL’s broad reading of the term “employee” under the Fair Labor Standards Act and the heightened focus on the “economic realities” of the business relationship between the worker and the purported employer indicate that wage and hour misclassification will be an enforcement priority for the DOL going forward.
Last week, the Supreme Court of the United States held that Interpretive Rules issued by administrative agencies do not have to undergo the notice-and-comment rulemaking procedures of the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”) even if they contradict or substantially change previously issued Interpretive Rules. Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Association, et al., —S.Ct.—, 2015 WL 998535 (Mar. 9, 2015). Specifically, the Court held that the Department of Labor was allowed to change its position on whether mortgage-loan officers were exempt from the overtime provisions of the FLSA even though (1) it did not follow the APA’s notice-and-comment rules prior to changing its position and (2) it had taken the exact opposite position just four year earlier.
The Union is acting as though it is a public interest group that is seeking to increase the minimum wage to $15. But its true goal is to become the restaurant workers’ exclusive bargaining representative. First, the Union ingratiates itself with restaurant workers by advocating for a substantial increase in the minimum wage. Second, it asks the workers to sign letters that they support and will participate in a strike with other employees in support of a minimum wage increase. Then the union seeks employee signatures on union authorization cards. Finally, once it has collected a sufficient number of signed authorization cards, it files an election petition with the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”).