Taylor et al v. Amspec LLC

Filing 45

ORDER entered with regards to the compensation calculation. (Signed by Chief Judge Lee H Rosenthal) Parties notified.(leddins, 4)

Download PDF
United States District Court Southern District of Texas IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION WELL TAYLOR, et al., Plaintiffs, VS. AMSPEC, L.L.C., formerly known as AMSPEC SERVICES, L.L.C., Defendant. § § § § § § § § § § ENTERED June 20, 2017 David J. Bradley, Clerk CIVIL ACTION NO. H-14-1730 ORDER The parties asked for clarification as to whether the “fluctuating workweek method” is the appropriate way to calculate compensation owed in this case. The court has researched the law and examined the undisputed evidence in the record and finds and concludes that as a matter of law the fluctuating workweek method applies. Hanson v. Camin Cargo Control, Inc., No. CIV. A. H-13-0027, 2015 WL 1737394 (S.D. Tex. Apr. 16, 2015) sets out the proper way to calculate the regular rate of pay under the fluctuating workweek method. (See Docket Entry No. 38 at 2). “The regular hourly rate of pay of an employee is determined by dividing his total remuneration for employment (except statutory exclusions) in any workweek by the total number of hours actually worked by him in that workweek for which such compensation was paid.” 29 C.F.R. §778.109. If the plaintiffs received some overtime payment that was erroneously calculated, that amount is deducted from the half-time premium owed in order to determine the final amount of unpaid overtime due. Hanson, 2015 WL 1737394, at *8. SIGNED on June 20, 2017, at Houston, Texas. ______________________________________ Lee H. Rosenthal Chief United States District Judge

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?