Client Alerts & Insights
The DOL Reissues Previously Rescinded Opinion Letters
January 18, 2018
Authored By:
Under the Obama administration, the Department of Labor (“DOL”) announced that it would no longer issue opinion letters. It also rescinded 17 opinion letters that had been issued under the Bush administration. Opinion letters historically served as a mechanism for the DOL to respond to fact-specific employer inquiries about wage and hour issues. While the opinion letters are not binding law, they remain a helpful resource for employers attempting to navigate the more ambiguous areas of the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”).
A recent development suggests that the DOL may, once again, begin issuing opinion letters. On January 5, 2018, the DOL reissued the 17 opinion letters that were rescinded under the Obama administration. These letters offer significant guidance on numerous wage and hour issues, including the exempt status of many specific positions. Of broader relevance, the reissued opinion letters include the following:
- FLSA 2018-14 – Salary deductions may be made when an employee is absent from work for one or more full days for personal reasons, other than sickness or disability. Deductions may be made for absences of one or more full days for sickness or disability, if the deductions are made pursuant to “a bona fide plan, policy or practice of providing compensation for loss of salary occasioned by such sickness or disability.” Deductions from an employee’s guaranteed salary may only be taken if the employee misses one or more full days of work. The regulations do not permit salary deductions for partial day absences.
- FLSA 2018-11 – In calculating the regular rate of pay for purposes of overtime, job bonuses that are conditioned only on performing the required work associated with the job must be included.
- FLSA 2018-7 – Employers may calculate salary deductions for a full-day’s absence on the number of hours actually missed. Therefore, where an employee is scheduled to work nine hours during the workday, the employer may make the deduction for the full nine hours from the employee’s salary (i.e., the amount of time actually missed).
The 17 reissued letters, along with older DOL opinion letters, can be found here. Although not every letter is pertinent to all employers, they remain a valuable source of information and worthy of employer review.
If you have any questions on this topic, please contact a member of our Labor & Employment Practice Group.
Eric Baisden | ebaisden@beneschlaw.com | 216.363.4676
Pete Kirsanow | pkirsanow@beneschlaw.com | 216.363.4481
Latest News
Ohio Board of Professional Conduct Issues Ohio Ethics Guide on Artificial Intelligence for Lawyers and Judicial Officers
Dispensary tip practices—especially involving hybrid roles like “Leads” or Agents-in-Charge—are increasingly being scrutinized as unlawful as a surge in wage-and-hour lawsuits claim that managers or employees with supervisory duties are improperly sharing in tips meant for front-line staff.
Connecticut Broadens Data Privacy Act Requirements Effective July 1, 2026
Key Takeaways Revised Applicability Scope and Exemptions Effective July 1, 2026, the CTDPA’s existing applicability thresholds are reduced, resulting in …
SCOTUS Extends FAA Exemption to Last-Mile Drivers: What the Flowers Foods decision means for motor carriers and transportation providers
On May 28, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Flowers Foods, Inc. v. Brock, expanding reach of the Federal Arbitration Act’s (“FAA”) Section 1 exemption for transportation workers engaged in interstate commerce. The Court held that a worker who transports goods on an intrastate leg of an interstate journey can qualify for Section 1’s exemption without crossing state lines or interacting with vehicles that do. This decision has significant implications for motor carriers and transportation providers that rely on arbitration agreements to resolve disputes with independent contractors and employee drivers.
Beyond the Buzzwords: State AGs Put Enforcement Muscle Behind Algorithmic Pricing and Age Verification Crackdowns
State AGs are doubling down—across party lines—on consumer protection, with a sharp focus on vulnerable groups and increased scrutiny of algorithmic pricing models and online age verification practices.