Pellegrino v. Robert Half International, Inc.

I have been task with ensuring our current pay practices are in-line with the current FLSA regulations. My organization has notice that there have been some talks lately in regards to how employers pay Recruiters (salary v hourly). In a recent court decision in the case of: Pellegrino v. Robert Half International, Inc. it was said that these employees where indeed wrongfully classified as exempt and should have been classified as nonexempt hourly. I understand that this took place in CA and CA law is a complex employment law within itself.

MY question is: We are a Recruitment Process Outsourcing (RPO) organization where we partner with our clients to manager their Talent Acquisition process. During this process we often have 3 team members align to a client account.

1. Sourcer – Currently paid hourly (nonexempt) these individuals are new graduates with no prior recruiting/HR experience. They will partner with a Sourcing Specialist to learn the ropes of recruiting. They will ultimately be responsible for x amount of requisitions where they will perform the phone screen, document there conversation within the ATS and forward resumes to the onsite recruiter who will then have a second phone interview and then provide a short list of candidates to the hiring manager.
2. Sourcing Specialist – Currently paid salary (exempt) these individuals are responsible for being a mentor the Sourcer’s that they are aligned with. In addition, they have 4+ years of recruiting experience and performs the same functions as the Sourcers.
3. On-Site Recruiter – Currently paid salary (exempt) these individuals are responsible for engaging with hiring managers, clients, building relationship, establishing new business within the client, conducting second phone screens and providing a short list to the hiring manager. In addition, they provide requisition assignment to the Sourcer and Sourcing Specialist.

Based upon the matrix of our Talent Acquisition process and based upon the court ruling above, would you say that we are ok as in regards to our current pay practices?

1 answer  |  asked May 15, 2013 12:53 PM [EST]  |  applies to Ohio

Answers (1)

Bruce Elfvin
Your question raises some far-reaching issues on whether or not an employee should be classified as exempt or non-exempt primarily for the purposes of overtime compensation. I cannot give you a definitive answer on this question without significantly more facts and going through the Pellegrino case decision, as it can be a variation on state law and also federal law. The major difference is that CA will allow class actions where the FLSA will require an opt in procedure.

If this is something that the organization needs to have answers on you need to actually take the information to an employment lawyer and let them do the research on the specific situation. This is basically hourly work for the attorney.

Our office can be reached at 216.382.2500.

posted by Bruce Elfvin  |  May 16, 2013 09:32 AM [EST]

Answer This Question

Sign In to Answer this Question

Related Questions with Answers

Have an Employment Law question?

Virginia Employment Lawyers

Matthew Kaplan Matthew Kaplan
The Kaplan Law Firm
Gerald Lutkenhaus Gerald Lutkenhaus
Virginia Workers Compensation & Disability Lawyer
Richmond, VA
Matthew Sutter Matthew Sutter
Sutter & Terpak, PLLC
Annandale, VA
Sheri Abrams Sheri Abrams
Sheri R. Abrams PLLC
Oakton, VA
Edward Lowry Edward Lowry
Charlottesville, VA

more Virginia Employment Lawyers