Weekly Law Resume - August 16, 2012: Insurance Adjusters are Not Exempt From Overtime Compensation

by Low, Ball & Lynch

[author: Laura S. Flynn]

Frances Harris, et al. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles (Liberty Mutual Ins. Co.)
California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District (July 23, 2012)

The Second Appellate District of the California Court of Appeal on remand from the Supreme Court has held that insurance claims adjusters are not exempt from overtime compensation because their primary work duties are the day-to-day tasks of adjusting individual claims not directly relating to management policies or general business operations.

The Appellate Court was directed on remand to review the trial court’s denial of a summary judgment filed by the adjusters regarding the affirmative defense that the adjusters were exempt administrative employees and thus not entitled to overtime. The Appellate Court was also given the option to review the issue as to whether the administrative exemption was a predominant issue common to the claims of all putative class members, warranting class certification.

In its decision, the Court held that the adjusters’ claims were governed by two different California regulations promulgated by California’s Industrial Welfare Commission (“IWC”): Wage Order No. 4-98 applying to claims arising before October 1, 2000, and Wage Order No. 4-2001, applying to claims arising thereafter. The wage orders govern the wages and hours of employees in “Professional, Technical, Clerical, Mechanical, and Similar Occupations.” (Cal.Code Regs., tit. 8, § 11040.) Both wage orders provide for certain exemptions for overtime compensation requirements. Exemptions are considered affirmative defenses. As a result, the insurance carriers, as the employers, bear the burden of proving the insurance adjusters are exempt.

Pursuant to Wage Order No. 4-2001, persons are employed in an administrative capacity if their duties and responsibilities involve office or nonmanual work “directly related to management policies or general business operations of [their] employer or [the] employer’s customers.” 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 or operations of the business. Both components must be satisfied before work can be considered “directly related” to management policies or general business operations in order to meet the test of exemption. Only the qualitative component was considered to be at issue in the case.

The Appellate Court looked to federal regulations under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 for guidance. Under the federal regulations, the qualitative component provides that an employee’s work duties meet the test of the exemption only if they “relat[e] to the administrative operations of a business as distinguished from ‘production’ or, in a retail or service establishment, ‘sales’ work.” The Appellate Court took that to mean that only duties performed at the level of policy or general operations can satisfy the qualitative component. In contrast, work duties that merely carry out the particular, day-to-day operations of the business are production, not administrative, work.

In regard to insurance adjusters, the Appellate Court concluded the undisputed facts showed they were primarily engaged in work that failed to satisfy the qualitative component of the “directly related” requirement because their primary duties are the day-to-day tasks involved in adjusting individual claims. “They investigate and estimate claims, make coverage determinations, set reserves, negotiate settlements, make settlement recommendations for claims beyond their settlement authority, identify potential fraud, and the like.” None of the work was considered to be carried on at the level of management policy or general operations. The Appellate Court acknowledged that some of the adjusters might do some work at the level of policy or general operations, i.e., participating in consultations as to whether the company should issue certain types of policies or serving on committees that determine how to better run the business. However, there was no evidence any of the adjusters primarily engaged in such work.

The Appellate Court acknowledged that its decision is inconsistent with a number of federal circuit and district court cases that have concluded claims adjusters are exempt, e.g., Palacio v. Progressive Ins. Co. 244 F.Supp.2d 1040, 1047 (C.D. Cal. 2002). However, the Appellate Court is not bound by decisions of the lower federal courts on issues of federal law, and found none of the federal cases involving claims adjusters persuasive. In regard to class certification, the Appellate Court concluded that the exemption status was a predominant issue common to the claims of all members of the class. The trial court was directed to enter an order granting the plaintiffs’ motion for summary adjudication of defendants’ affirmative defense based on administrative exemption and denying in its entirety defendants’ motion to decertify the class.

The opinion is consistent with the California Appellate Courts’ policy of liberally construing wage and hour regulations in furtherance of their remedial purpose which results in exemptions to the regulations being narrowing construed.

For a copy of the complete decision see:



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.

© Low, Ball & Lynch | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Low, Ball & Lynch

Low, Ball & Lynch 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.
Custom Email Digest
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):

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.


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.