Adding this simple sentence to your pay policy can save you in court
Granted, no employer wants to wind up on the wrong end of a misclassification lawsuit.
But with today’s constantly evolving job descriptions, even the most meticulous and careful employers could wind up in court by accidentally misclassifying certain workers.And when that happens, the financial costs can be
staggering. However, according to employment attorney Michael D. Yim, there is a very simple step employers can take to limit their exposure to a misclassification lawsuit.
‘Express understanding’ key
That step involves adding some version of the following sentence to all employment contracts, handbooks and company policies:
“For exempt employees, your salary is intended to pay for all hours worked during each pay period, regardless of your scheduled or tracked hours.”
For legal purposes, this sentences shows employees have an “express understanding” of their payment.
Seems redundant, doesn’t it? After all, simply paying an employee on a salary basis eliminates the need for a time-based pay structure.
But that’s the type of thinking that gets many employers in legal trouble, according to Yim.
Reason: The DOL’s own regs on how to calculate damages for misclassification are vague.So, without a sentence like the one Yim suggests embedding in key employment documents, courts will assume that an employee’s salary only applies to the first 40 hours of their workweek.
Fluctuating workweek factor
And that subtle difference in pay-rate calculations can wind up costing employees a lot if they’re found to owe employees OT pay in a lawsuit.
Here’s why, using an example of an employee who earns $900 per week and works five hours of overtime.
Without the “express understanding” sentence, the regular rate of pay would be calculated by dividing $900 by 40, which would come out to $22.50 per hour. This means the employee would make 1.5 times that rate for five hours of OT.
With an “express understanding” sentence added, the regular rate of pay would be calculated via the “fluctuating workweek” method by dividing $900 by 45 (regular hours plus the five hours of overtime).
That would make the regular rate $20/hr. And the fluctuating workweek method would allow you to pay just 0.5 times the $20/hr regular rate – not the 1.5 – for the OT. So, the OT owed is significantly less than the previous example. When you consider many misclassification suits include a class of workers, the savings really add up.
For a more detailed example of how Yim’s calculation, visit.
Free Training & Resources
Further Reading
A big reason employers are still allowing hybrid work is business benefits like reduced operating costs. But it’s also harder to ensu...
The list of fraudulent brokerages, securities firms and even financial regulators just keeps getting longer. Hundreds, potentially thousand...
The minimum wage for certain federal contractors increased to $13.65 per hour on May 11, 2026. The tipped cash wage rose to $9.55. Here are...
The demand for finance chiefs is growing. Yet more companies are replacing their CFOs. Even so, CFOs are a lot less worried about AI taking...
No matter how hard you try, sometimes you and your finance team fail. We make mistakes. We miss deadlines. We fall short. In fact, a...
Most state withholding tables coincide with the start of the calendar year. But mid-year adjustments happen too, and they can catch payroll...