Department of Labor Modifies Stance on Obama Era 80/20 Rule for Tipped Employees

by Robert P. Rudolph

On November 8, 2018 the Department of Labor (“DOL”) issued Opinion Letter FLSA 2018-27, which rolls back the Obama-era’s enforcement of what is commonly referred to as the “80/20 Rule.” Many states allow an employer to pay a lower tipped rate to tipped service employees, such as waiters and bussers. For example, in Massachusetts, the basic minimum wage is currently $12 per hour, but tipped employees can be paid a lower service rate of $4.35 per hour, so long as the sum of the tipped rate and the tips received by the employee equal or exceed the basic minimum wage. In other words, employers receive a “tip credit” of $7.65 per hour.

The 80/20 Rule, contained in section 30d00(f) of the DOL’s internal Field Operations Handbook, acted as a limit on the use of the lower tipped rate. The 80/20 Rule stated that no tip credit could be taken on “related duties” where a tipped employee spends more than 20 percent of working time performing duties related to the tipped occupation, but not directly producing tips, such as cleaning and setting tables, rolling silverware, making coffee, etc.

The Opinion Letter recognizes that the 80/20 Rule has resulted in confusion and that it would be difficult, if not impossible, for employers to account for the exact amount of time each employee spends on every “related” task performed. The Opinion Letter significantly retracts the 80/20 Rule, stating that going forward, “[w]e do not intend to place a limitation on the amount of duties related to a tip-producing occupation that may be performed, so long as they are performed contemporaneously with direct consumer-service duties…” In other words, as long as the duties are performed contemporaneously with duties involving direct service to customers or for a reasonable time immediately before or after such direct-service duties, it does not matter whether a service employee spends more than 20 percent of working time performing related, non-tipped work. This should help curtail inconsistent application of the 80/20 rule, which has previously resulted in litigation throughout the country.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, employers would be ill advised to change their compensation structures based solely on the Opinion Letter. Instead, employers should wait and see how the change plays out in the courts and the legislature, both state and federal. Massachusetts law provides a prevailing employee in a wage claim with a statutory entitlement to three times single damages and attorney’s fees. All employers, whether or not using the tipped rate, must be familiar with and insist on strict compliance with the Massachusetts Wage Act.

Read the November 8, 2018 Opinion Letter FLSA 2018-27.

Published by
Robert Rudolph

Recent Posts

Mere Acquisition and Dual Ownership Not Enough to Pierce the Corporate Veil

In Parexel Int'l LLC v. PrisymID Ltd., the United States District Court of Massachusetts allowed…

1 week ago

Casey Sack Presented at MBA’s program “Expert Witnesses in Construction Disputes: Strategic Lawyering at All Stages of the Case”

Casey Sack presented at the Massachusetts Bar Association’s CLE program, “Expert Witnesses in Construction Disputes:…

3 weeks ago

Jim Rudolph Named a Go To Construction Lawyer by Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly

Jim Rudolph has been named a Go To Construction Lawyer by Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly. The…

1 month ago

Does a General Contractor’s Commercial General Liability Insurance Provide Coverage Against Damage Caused by a Subcontractor’s Defective Work?

Construction projects often involve work performed by subcontractors. While this makes sense given the varying…

1 month ago

Rudolph Friedmann Secures Sweeping Victory for Business Owner in Complex Business Litigation Case Including Award of Attorney’s Fees Pursuant to Indemnification Agreement

Firm’s client accused of breach of fiduciary duty, conversion and breach of contract; lawsuit requested…

1 month ago

Civil Litigants Beware, Recorded Conversations Are Coming in as Evidence

Because of a loophole in the Massachusetts Wiretap Statute, also known as G.L. c. 272,…

2 months ago