Client Alerts & Insights
The Companionship Services Exemption: On the Verge of Extinction?
December 1, 2011
Recently, the Department of Labor (the “DOL”) issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (the “Notice”) that would prohibit third party employers from using the “companionship services” exemption to the minimum wage and overtime requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act (the “FLSA”). Currently, Section 13(a)(15) of the FLSA provides third party employers with both a minimum wage and an overtime exemption for domestic service employees who provide companionship services for individuals who, because of age or infirmity, are unable to care for themselves (“companionship services”).
In the Notice, the DOL explains that the health care industry, as a whole, has undergone significant change in the last 35 years. The DOL reasons that it needs to amend its regulations because there has been and will continue to be an increase in the use of home health care workers and the circumstances surrounding the employment of these workers were not envisioned when the regulations were first promulgated. The DOL proposes to narrow the definition of “companionship services,” clarify the activities that are considered incidental to “companionship services,” and amend the regulation pertaining to third party employment of domestic workers who provide “companionship services.”
Significantly, the proposed rule would deny all third party employers the use of the minimum wage and overtime exemptions for workers who provide “companionship services.” The proposed rule would, however, continue to permit individuals, families, and households to use the exemption, subject to its revised interpretative guidance.
The DOL created a website specifically for this proposed rule. The website provides the Notice, frequently asked questions, and a fact sheet concerning the changes. Interested parties have until February 27, 2012 to submit written comments.
Benesch has significant experience defending employers’ rights under the “companionship services” exemption and regularly assists clients in providing comments to federal agencies.
To discuss the implications of the Notice and how it might affect your business, please contact one of the following Benesch attorneys:
Maynard (Mike) A. Buck at 216.363.4694 or mbuck@beneschlaw.com
Peter N. Kirsanow at 216.363.4481 or pkirsanow@beneschlaw.com
Joseph N. Gross at 216.363.4163 or jgross@beneschlaw.com
Patrick O. Peters at 216.363.4434 or ppeters@beneschlaw.com
Latest News
Back To Wright Line: NLRB Resets Standards for Workplace Misconduct
Employers have regained greater flexibility to address offensive or abusive employee conduct that occurs during union activity or other activity protected by the National Labor Relations Act. On September 23, 2026, the National Labor Relations Board (the “Board”) issued a significant decision in Lion Elastomers LLC, 375 NLRB No. 41, restoring the prior standard for evaluating discipline when employee misconduct occurs during protected concerted activity from General Motors LLC, 369 NLRB No. 127.
Can an Algorithm Commit a Tort? The Circuit Split Over Section 230
A growing circuit split is reshaping the scope of Section 230 immunity. While the Fourth and Ninth Circuits continue to view algorithmic recommendations as protected publisher conduct, the Third Circuit has taken a narrower approach, holding that certain algorithm-driven content recommendations may constitute a platform’s own conduct and therefore fall outside Section 230’s protections.
Key Considerations for Businesses facing Defamation Issues: Strategies for Protecting Your Reputation and Brand
Defamation risk for businesses has never been higher. Even five years ago, unfavorable press could be expected to fade from …
SDNY Bankruptcy Court Offers Further Direction on Default Interest and Fee Recovery
The SDNY Bankruptcy Court’s written decision in 1300 Desert Willow builds on the framework established in Mako, providing additional guidance on when a debtor can overcome the presumption that an oversecured creditor is entitled to post-petition default interest at the contractual rate.