Johnson v. Heckmann Water Resources (CVR), Inc.
758 F.3d 627
5th Cir.2014Background
- Plaintiffs Kevin Johnson and Brad Smith were hourly, non‑exempt employees working 12‑hour shifts seven consecutive days every other Thursday (7-on/7-off pattern).
- Employer CVR (later HWR) paid biweekly and used a fixed Monday–Sunday workweek to calculate overtime.
- Because plaintiffs’ seven‑day shifts spanned two employer workweeks, their paystubs showed fewer overtime hours than if the workweek began on their first workday (Thursday).
- Plaintiffs sued under the FLSA seeking additional overtime, arguing their workweek should run Thursday–Wednesday to capture more overtime per workweek.
- The district court granted summary judgment for the employer; the Fifth Circuit affirmed, holding the employer’s fixed Monday–Sunday workweek did not violate the FLSA.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether using a fixed Monday–Sunday workweek that splits an employee’s consecutive 7‑day shift schedule violates the FLSA’s overtime requirements | The workweek should reflect their actual Thursday–Wednesday consecutive work schedule, which would produce more overtime | Employer may establish a fixed workweek (e.g., Monday–Sunday); regulation permits any fixed 168‑hour period and does not require matching actual shift cycles | Employer did not violate the FLSA by using a Monday–Sunday workweek; a fixed, regularly recurring 168‑hour workweek is sufficient |
Key Cases Cited
- Meza v. Intelligent Mex. Mktg., Inc., 720 F.3d 577 (5th Cir. 2013) (summary judgment standard and view of facts in FLSA context)
- Harvill v. Westward Commc’ns, L.L.C., 433 F.3d 428 (5th Cir. 2005) (elements for FLSA overtime claim and burden shifting)
- Anderson v. Mount Clemens Pottery Co., 328 U.S. 680 (U.S. 1946) (burden shifting on proving hours worked in FLSA cases)
- Meredith v. Time Ins. Co., 980 F.2d 352 (5th Cir. 1993) (binding effect of DOL regulations under FLSA)
- Belt v. Emcare, Inc., 444 F.3d 403 (5th Cir. 2006) (weight of DOL opinion letters interpreting ambiguous regulations)
- Abshire v. Redland Energy Servs., L.L.C., 695 F.3d 792 (8th Cir. 2012) (employer may establish workweek; splitting an employee’s schedule across workweeks does not alone violate FLSA)
- Christensen v. Harris Cnty., 529 U.S. 576 (U.S. 2000) (administrative language like “may” is permissive)
- Skidmore v. Swift & Co., 323 U.S. 134 (U.S. 1944) (degree of deference to agency interpretations based on persuasiveness)