California Supreme Court Depublishes Case Holding That Insurance Adjusters Are Nonexempt Employees

by Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP
Contact

[authors: Esra A. Hudson and Justin Jones Rodriguez]

On July 23, 2012, a California appellate court decided Harris v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, holding that insurance adjusters were not covered by the administrative exemption and therefore must be paid overtime pay.  The decision troubled employers in the insurance industry, who typically had classified adjusters as exempt employees.  On October 24, 2012, the California Supreme Court took issue with the Court of Appeal's opinion, which it depublished, and also denied further review.  As a result, the case is no longer binding legal authority and cannot be cited as precedent.

California employees are entitled to overtime pay for work in excess of eight hours in one workday or forty hours in one week.  However, in 1998, California's Industrial Welfare Commission ("IWC") promulgated Wage Order 4-1998 limiting the right to overtime pay by making "persons employed in administrative, executive, or professional capacities" exempt from overtime compensation requirements.  One year later, the California Legislature found that the order caused roughly eight million California workers to lose their right to overtime pay, and enacted the Eight-Hour-Day Restoration and Work Place Responsibility Act of 1999 in order to narrow the scope of the administrative exemption.

In Harris, a class of insurance claim adjusters sued Liberty Mutual in 2001 on the grounds that they had been misclassified as exempt, and thus were entitled to back pay.  Relying on Bell v. Farmers Insurance Exchange, the Court of Appeal rejected Liberty Mutual's argument that the adjusters were administrative employees. 

The California Supreme Court reviewed the decision last year and unanimously concluded that the Court of Appeal had used an erroneous analysis when it decided that claims adjusters are not exempt from California's overtime pay requirement.  According to the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal relied too heavily on the administrative/production worker dichotomy used in the Bell decision, and failed to consider more recent IWC and applicable federal regulations which are supposed to guide California in applying the administrative exemption to the general overtime rule.  The Supreme Court's decision seemed to signal greater ease for employers in classifying employees as exempt.

But on remand, the Court of Appeal again held that the adjusters were nonexempt employees entitled to overtime pay.  Harris was significant because it purported to establish a clear test for when an employee's work is directly related to management policies or general business operations so that the employee may properly be classified as exempt.[1]  Harris held that work at a policy or general level meets the requirement because such work is directly related qualitatively to management policy and general business operations; on the other hand, work that merely carries out a business's day-to-day operations is production and not administrative work, according to Harris

Before Harris, adjusters' work seemed to fall within the federal and state administrative exemptions because such work includes negotiation of settlement agreements, representing companies in other respects, and making purchases-all activities listed in the federal regulations as potentially administrative.  Indeed, Harris cited more than a dozen federal cases, most holding that adjusters do work that is directly related to management policies or general business operations.  Harris, however, openly challenged the logic of such holdings by arguing that even though such work may be administrative in nature, it may also be more related to a company's day-to-day operations, depending on the nature of the company.

According to Harris, insurance adjusters, despite having varying levels of decision making power, have generally uniform duties that constitute an important part of the day-to-day production of an insurance company's primary product: transferring risk.  Although the adjusters in Harris each had the power to negotiate on Liberty Mutual's behalf, such power was limited to entering settlements within a predetermined range.  In order to enter a settlement not within that range, an adjuster was required to seek authority up the company chain.

In other words, Harris stood for the principle that in a fairly hierarchical business, fewer employees than previously thought may be classified as exempt.  That is, even employees that perform work traditionally thought to be administrative were nonexempt under Harris when that work does not include policymaking rather than mere adherence to the management policy. 

Although the California Supreme Court chose not to review the Harris decision and issue its own opinion, its choice to depublish the case and deny review makes it clear that the Court of Appeal's analysis in Harris has no further impact beyond the Harris case itself.

 [1] The appellate court's decision was rooted in its interpretation of Wage Order 4-2001, which is substantively indistinct from Wage Order 4-1998.  Wage Order 4-2001, however, describes the administrative exemption in greater detail than its predecessor by incorporating by reference sections of the Code of Federal Regulations.  Examining the language of Wage Order 4-2001 and Federal Regulations former part 541.205, the appellate court held that "work qualifies as administrative when it is directly related to management policies or general business operations.  Work qualifies as directly related if it satisfies two components.  First, it must be qualitatively administrative.  Second, quantitatively, it must be of substantial importance to the management and operations of the business."  Harris v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 2012 WL 2990020, at *5 (Jul. 23, 2012) (internal quotation marks and italics omitted).

 

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP
Contact
more
less

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):
hide

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.

Security

JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at info@jdsupra.com. In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at: info@jdsupra.com.

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.