FOR YOUR PRACTICE | EMPLOYMENT LAW
U.S. Supreme Court Continues Effort to Balance the Fair Labor Standards Acts By Removing Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals Heightened Standard of Proof for Exemptions BY JEFFREY M. SCHWABER, ESQ. AND EDUARDO S. GARCIA, ESQ.
ON JANUARY 15, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court held in E.M.D. Sales
Inc. v. Carrera that a “preponderance-of-the-evidence” standard, as opposed to “clear and convincing evidence,” is the appropriate standard of proof when an employer attempts to assert an exemption under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).1 This decision eliminates the Fourth Circuit’s heightened standard of proof for FLSA exemption claims and brings it into line with other Circuits. By so doing, it continues the Supreme Court’s recent approach of having a closer balance between the protections afforded to employees and employers. The FLSA was enacted by Congress in 1938 to enshrine minimum wage and overtime protections for employees.2 At the same time, Congress established certain specifically delineated exemptions to those requirements, including but not limited to the “outside salesman exemption.”3 Shortly after the FLSA was enacted, the Supreme Court—with a New Deal era orientation—cautioned that: “[a] ny exemption from such humanitarian and remedial legislation must therefore be narrowly construed, giving due
1 2 3 4
regard to the plain meaning of statutory language and the intent of Congress.”4 Since that time, for many years, the “narrowly construed” edict was used as a rationale for imposing a more rigid scrutiny on employers who sought to demonstrate entitlement to exemptions from overtime claims. In the Fourth Circuit, the Court went so far as to apply the heightened “clear and convincing” standard of proof to an employer seeking an exemption, notwithstanding the absence of any explicit statutory justification for doing so.
No. 23-217, 2025 WL 96207 (U.S. Jan. 15, 2025). 29 U.S.C. §§ 206 & 207. 29 U.S.C. § 213. 324 U.S. 490, 493 (1945).
MARYLAND BAR JOURNAL | VOLUME 6 ISSUE 3 41