OnLabor

Law. Workers. Organizing.

Editorials

Overtime Rule Update: 5th Circuit Grants Expedited Review of Appeal

Lauren Godles

Lauren Godles is a student at Harvard Law School.

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has just granted the DOL’s motion for expedited briefing and oral argument in its appeal of the nationwide injunction issued against the Overtime Rule, despite opposition from the state attorneys general who filed the suit. The briefing schedule is even more accelerated than requested by DOL in its motion, in which it requested briefing be completed by Feb. 7, 2017.

The briefing schedule is as follows: Appellant (DOL)’s brief due 12/16/16; Amicus briefs in support due 12/23/16. Appellee’s brief due 01/17/17; Amicus briefs in support due 01/24/17. Reply brief for Appellants due 01/31/17. Note that Appellant’s reply brief is due just 11 days after President-elect Trump is set to take office. Read more here.

Oral arguments will be scheduled by the court after Jan. 31, 2017, and OnLabor will continue to monitor the case closely.

Daily News & Commentary

Start your day with our roundup of the latest labor developments. See all

OnLabor In The News

Browse all

More From OnLabor

See more

Ruelas v. County of Alameda — California Pretrial Detainees Denied Minimum Wage for Corporate Labor (Part 3)

In Ruelas v. County of Alameda, the Supreme Court of California denied pretrial detainees’ state minimum wage claim, reasoning that section 4019.3 of the state’s Penal Code — capping jail laborers’ wages at two dollars per day — instead governed.  The first part of this three-part series discussed the California Supreme Court’s holding and reasoning.  The second part gave a history of California’s constitution and jail labor in the state, concluding that the two-dollar daily wage cap could not have applied to plaintiffs, who were pretrial detainees performing unpaid labor for a corporation.  

Ruelas v. County of Alameda — California Pretrial Detainees Denied Minimum Wage for Corporate Labor (Part 2)

In Ruelas v. County of Alameda, the Supreme Court of California held that pretrial detainees forced to labor for a corporation are ineligible for a minimum wage under the state’s Labor Code.  The court construed Penal Code section 4019.3 broadly, interpreting it as incompatible with California’s Labor Code. The court concluded that the Penal Code prevents pretrial detainees from earning more than two dollars per day for their labor, absent a local ordinance.  

How Three Simple Labor Laws Helped Unions Organize Amazon and UBER in Canada

In early July,  the British Columbia Labour Relations Board (BCLRB) certified UFCW-Canada as the bargaining representative for over 500 UBER drivers in the province’s capital city of Victoria.  A few days later, the BCLRB issued another decision that certified the union Unifor (formerly the Canadian Auto Workers) for a bargaining unit of hundreds of employees employed at an Amazon distribution centre […]

Ruelas v. County of Alameda — California Pretrial Detainees Denied Minimum Wage for Corporate Labor (Part 1)

Pretrial detainees in Santa Rita Jail are forced to labor for Aramark, a food-preparation company that provides meals to third parties outside of the jail. Neither Aramark nor the county pays detainees for their labor.  In 1990, California amended its constitution to allow companies to contract with prisons — facilities run by the state or federal government that detain convicted offenders — for labor, so long as prisoners were paid comparable wages to non-inmate laborers.  

Enjoy OnLabor’s fresh takes on the day’s labor news, right in your inbox.

Sections

Connect