Brent Hebert, et al. v. FMC Technologies, Incorporated

Petitioner Brent Hebert serviced mechanical equipment on offshore oil and gas wells. FMC paid him a salary plus a daily bonus (called a “field service premium”) when he worked offshore. Often times, Hebert’s total take-home pay was two times—or more— his base salary. He sued FMC under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, 29 U.S.C. §§ 201-219 (“FLSA”), claiming that he was entitled to retroactive overtime pay. Petitioner Aaron Mohammed joined the lawsuit by consenting in writing to be part of it under 29 U.S.C. § 216(b). FMC responded that Hebert was not entitled to overtime pay under the Act’s exemptions for executive, administrative and professional employees, 29 U.S.C. § 213(a)(1) (“EAP exemptions”), because he performed professional duties and was compensated on a salary basis. See, 29 C.F.R. § 541.300. The Fifth Circuit agreed even though, with respect to the latter, Hebert’s base salary did not bear a “reasonable relationship” to the amount he actually earned in a typical week. See, 29 C.F.R. § 541.604(b). It also held that Mohammed was not ever a party to the case because the district court did not “certify a class.” In reaching these conclusions, the Fifth Circuit ignored relevant decisions of this Court and regulations and other authority promulgated by the Department of Labor. Its decision also conflicts with decisions from the First, Third, Ninth, Sixth and Eleventh Circuits.