Congress finds the following:
(1)
The proposed rule of the Department of Labor entitled “Defining and Delimiting the Exemptions for Executive, Administrative, Professional, Outside Sales and Computer Employees” (80 Fed. Reg. 38516 (July 6, 2015)) provides a minimum salary requirement that would be—
(A)
a 113 percent increase during the first year after the final rule takes effect from the salary threshold in effect on February 29, 2016; and
(B)
an increase that would set the Federal minimum salary threshold 20 percent higher than the minimum salary threshold under any State law effective on the date of enactment of this Act.
(2)
The Secretary significantly underestimated the cost of compliance with the July 6, 2015, proposed rule. Public comments calculate such rule will impose financial and non-financial costs substantially higher than those estimated by the Department.
(3)
According to the Office of Advocacy of the Small Business Administration, the initial regulatory flexibility analysis of the July 6, 2015, proposed rule required under section 603 of title 5, United States Code, failed to adequately identify the number of small entities affected by such rule and failed to address how such rule would affect regions with lower costs of living and differences in certain industries. On September 4, 2015, the Office of Advocacy of the Small Business Administration submitted comments to the Secretary regarding such rule, including recommendations to—
(A)
reanalyze “the economic impact of this rule on small businesses”, to “provide a more accurate estimate of the small entities impacted by this proposal”, and to “include an analysis of industry sub-sectors, regional differences, and revenue sizes”;
(B)
reanalyze “the number of small non-profit organizations and small governmental jurisdictions . . . that are affected by this rule and the economic impact of this rule on these entities”; and
(C)
provide greater transparency with respect to “compliance cost data” and to “utilize data provided in the comment process to accurately estimate the human resources and financial management costs of this regulation”.
(4)
The Secretary did not consider the potential impact of the July 6, 2015, proposed rule on workplace flexibility. Public comments address concerns that employees who are reclassified from exempt to nonexempt employees may no longer be able to participate in workplace flexibility arrangements and programs.
(5)
The Secretary did not analyze the potential impact of the July 6, 2015, proposed rule on companies that operate in multiple States with different costs of living and different salary scales, and the costs and unique complications for these employers associated with reclassifying thousands of employees in multiple States.
(6)
The July 6, 2015, proposed rule automatically updates the salary threshold on an annual basis for purposes of defining employees subject to the exemption under section 13(a)(1) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (
29 U.S.C. 213(a)(1)) for all subsequent years, contrary to the requirement under such section that the definitions applicable for the exemption shall be “defined and delimited from time to time by regulations of the Secretary”. The Secretary does not have the authority to increase the salary threshold on an annual or other basis without conducting notice and comment rulemaking with respect to each change in accordance with section 553 of title 5, United States Code.
(7)
Although not proposed in the July 6, 2015, proposed rule, the Secretary indicated that changes to the duties tests may be included in the final rule, without providing for notice and comment regarding the specific proposed revisions.