Mass-Peculiarities: An Employers Guide to Wage & Hour Law in the Bay State 2022 Edition

© 2022 Seyfarth Shaw LLP Massachusetts Wage & Hour Peculiarities, 2022 ed. | 97 However, in Marzuq v. Cadete Enterprises, Inc. , the First Circuit vacated a decision granting an employer’s motion for summary judgment based on the similarities between that case and Burger King , holding that a dispute of material fact existed as to whether two store managers at a food retail store satisfied the primary duties test. 535 In Marzuq , the First Circuit emphasized that the managers alleged that they spent 90 percent of their time serving customers, making food, sweeping floors, and performing other non-managerial duties and had insufficient time to perform their management duties. 536 They also claimed to have had limited decision-making authority, were subject to close supervision, and received very similar pay to non-exempt employees. 537 Based on these allegations, the court reversed the grant of summary judgment. In Goodrow v. Lane Bryant, Inc. , Massachusetts’s highest court held that an employee who worked as a “co-sales manager” at a retail store was not a “bona fide executive” exempt from overtime provisions even though she had temporarily assumed managerial duties at the store. 538 The Court found that the employee did not qualify for the exemption because she did not spend more than 50 percent of her time performing managerial duties, she directed the work of only one part-time sales associate and had no authority to influence personnel decisions, and she was primarily occupied with carrying out day-to-day activities of the retail business. 539 b. Administrative Employee Exemption To qualify for the administrative exemption, an employee must meet all of the following tests: 1. The employee must be compensated on a salary or fee basis at a rate not less than $684.00 per week. 2. The employee’s primary duty must be the performance of office or non-manual work directly related to the management or general business operations of the employer or the employer’s customers (often referred to as the administrative- production dichotomy). 3. The employee’s primary duty must involve the exercise of discretion and independent judgment with respect to matters of significance. 540 535 Marzuq , 807 F.3d at 446-47. The First Circuit also dist inguished Burger King because that decision was based on the dist rict court ’s factual findings after a bench t rial, whereas in Marzuq , the dist rict court was required, on a summary judgment mot ion, to view all fact s in the light most favorable to the plaint iff-managers. Id . at 439. 536 Id. at 434. 537 Id . The First Circuit analyzed four factors in evaluat ing the primary duty: (1) relat ive importance of managers’ exempt and other dut ies; (2) amount of t ime spent on exempt work; (3) freedom from direct supervision; and (4) the relat ionship between managers’ salaries and the wages paid hourly employees for similar non-exempt work. Marzuq , 807 F.3d at 431. 538 Goodrow v. Lane Bryant, Inc. , 432 Mass. 165, 173 (2000). 539 Id . at 172. 540 29 C.F.R. § 541.200. The regulat ions provide separate requirement s for academic administ rat ive employees in educat ional establishment s whose primary duty is performing administ rat ive funct ions direct ly related to academic inst ruct ion in an