What You Need to Know About the Department of Labor's New PAID Pilot Program
The DOL's Payroll Audit Independent Determination (PAID) is a pilot program implemented in March, which allows employers to self-report any overtime or minimum wage violations discovered as a result of a self-audit and work with the DOL's Wage and Hour Division (WHD) to address these violations.
November 20, 2018 at 10:00 AM
5 minute read
The DOL's Payroll Audit Independent Determination (PAID) is a pilot program implemented in March, which allows employers to self-report any overtime or minimum wage violations discovered as a result of a self-audit and work with the DOL's Wage and Hour Division (WHD) to address these violations. PAID was extended for an additional six months on Oct. 9, so employers interested in the program can participate through April 2019.
Benefits:
- Employers accepted into the program can avoid the liquidated damages provision of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) which typically will attach to claims made by employees, or as part of DOL investigations;
- Generally, if the WHD finds other violations, those will be addressed as part of the PAID program; and
- Employers who resolve violations through PAID avoid having to pay attorney fees for the employees, and generally save on their own legal expenses.
A word of caution: Employers who have widespread minimum wage and overtime violations may not be the best candidate for the PAID program, as they will need to be willing to pay 100 percent of back wages owed to all current and former employees for the past two years. Employees have the option of declining the receipt of back wages payment, and may refuse to sign the release. If this occurs, that employee can retain an attorney, seek liquidated damages, as well as seek payment for three years of wages (if applicable) rather than the two years covered by PAID. Participating in PAID also does not shield the employer from being sued under local or state laws regarding minimum wage or overtime violations. Further, the DOL is not clear as to whether employers are allowed to dispute the findings of the WHD with regard to determining the extent of violations.
Employers interested in participating must do the following:
First, determine your eligibility:
Eligible employers are those employers covered by the FLSA, and which are willing to resolve all potential minimum wage and overtime claims, as well as willing to commit to future compliance with the FLSA. There are two ways for FLSA coverage to attach:
Enterprise Coverage: Any employer with at least two employees and a gross annual volume of sales or business done of at least $500,000 is considered an “enterprise” and covered by the FLSA. Hospitals, government agencies, businesses engaged in care for the sick, aged or mentally ill, and schools are also covered enterprises.
Individual Coverage: Even if your business is not an “enterprise,” your employees may be covered by individually. If your employees engage in interstate commerce, produce goods for interstate commerce, provide services closely related to the production of goods for interstate commerce, or provide domestic service are covered individuals under the FLSA.
In order to participate, employers must be willing to resolve all potential minimum wage and overtime claims, as well as be willing to commit to future compliance with the FLSA. Further, any employer who has been found by the DOL or a court of law to have violated minimum wage or overtime requirements of the FLSA by engaging in the same compensation practices at issue are barred from participating in PAID.
Second, complete a Compliance Assistance Review:
Eligible employees then must complete the Compliance Assistance Review, an online training/educational program. The program generates a certificate of completion which must be presented to the DOL in order to participate in PAID.
Third, conduct your self-audit:
Employers must take a close look at payroll procedures and determine any potential violations which have occurred in the past two years, employees potentially affected, dates in which employees were affected, and back wages owed to each employee.
Employers cannot participate in PAID if the employer is already being investigated by the DOL, or is actively litigating a wage claim with a former or current employee (which includes the receipt of a demand letter from an attorney).
Submit the above to the Wage and Hour Division (WHD):
If accepted:
- WHD will review the information submitted by the employer. If additional violations are found by the WHD, it is unclear whether they will include them in this audit or not.
- WHD will oversee settlements to employees and will ensure that back wages are computed for all former and current employees during the past two years.
- Employees have the option to receive the settlement and sign the release. However, if an employee decides not to resolve with the WHD, that employee can still file suit and may seek liquidated damages.
- Employees who sign a release as part of the PAID program can still file suit under any applicable state or local laws which may apply.
If denied: The WHD states that it will not use the employer's request to participate in the PAID program as a basis for an investigation unless WHD has reason to believe that health or safety are at risk.
Elizabeth P. Johnson is a shareholder at Fowler White Burnett where she focuses her practice on all aspects of labor and employment Law. Contact her at [email protected].
Lindsay M. Massillon is an associate at the firm where she focuses her practice on labor and employment law and commercial litigation. Contact her at [email protected].
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllData Breaches, Increased Regulatory Risk and Florida’s New Digital Bill of Rights
7 minute readNavigating Florida's Products Liability Law: Defective Products, Warnings and the Pursuit of Justice
6 minute readNavigating Florida Property Insurance Claims in a Post-Fee-Shifting World
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250