Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Time-and-a-half

Time and a half refers to a premium pay rate of one and one-half times an employee's regular hourly rate, typically applied to hours exceeding the standard workweek threshold. In the United States, this compensation structure is enshrined in the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) of , which mandates such payment for nonexempt workers performing more than 40 hours of work in a single workweek at a covered job. The provision aims to compensate employees for additional effort while discouraging employers from relying excessively on extended hours rather than expanding workforce size. Enacted as part of broader reforms to address labor exploitation amid the , the FLSA initially required time and a half for hours beyond 44 per week, with the threshold reduced to 40 hours by an amendment effective in 1940. Exemptions apply to certain , administrative, , and other categories of employees meeting specific and duties tests, though ongoing debates and regulatory updates—such as proposed expansions of overtime eligibility—highlight tensions between worker protections and business costs. Some states impose stricter rules, like daily overtime triggers or higher premiums, superseding federal minimums where applicable. Calculations incorporate the full regular rate, including nondiscretionary bonuses, to ensure accurate premium computation. Despite its foundational role in modern wage law, enforcement challenges persist, with violations often stemming from misclassification of workers as exempt.

Definition and Core Concept

Meaning and Calculation

Time-and-a-half denotes compensation at 150% of an employee's standard wage rate for qualifying hours worked. This pay structure incentivizes additional labor beyond regular shifts by providing a 50% uplift over the base rate per eligible hour. The involves first determining the overtime rate by multiplying the regular hourly rate by 1.5, then applying that rate to the number of overtime hours. For instance, if an employee's regular rate is $20 per hour, the time-and-a-half rate is $30 per hour ($20 × 1.5); for 5 overtime hours, the total pay amounts to $150 ($30 × 5). This method ensures the is computed on an hourly basis for hours exceeding applicable thresholds, such as 40 hours in a workweek, while excluding non-work periods like unpaid breaks or meal times.

Distinction from Other Premium Pay Rates

Time-and-a-half pay, at 150% of an employee's regular hourly rate, provides a moderate premium for hours, distinguishing it from compensation, which offers no premium and pays only the (100%) for additional hours worked. is often applied in salaried exempt positions or certain casual arrangements where overtime premiums are not mandated, but it falls short of federal requirements for non-exempt workers under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), which specifies time-and-a-half for hours exceeding 40 in a workweek. In contrast to double time, which compensates at 200% of the regular rate, time-and-a-half serves as a less aggressive disincentive for extended work, commonly applied to standard overtime thresholds like those over 40 hours weekly under FLSA guidelines. Double time typically applies to more demanding conditions, such as work on holidays, , or after 12 consecutive hours in a day, as seen in specific regulations or agreements that escalate beyond initial overtime premiums. For instance, while standardizes time-and-a-half for routine overtime, some contracts require progression to double time after 8 or 12 hours daily, creating a tiered structure where time-and-a-half addresses moderate without the steeper cost of double time. This 50% premium in time-and-a-half strikes a balance between compensating workers for fatigue and extra effort while keeping employer costs lower than the full doubling in double time scenarios, though applicability varies by contract or local rules without altering its core role as an intermediate rate.

Historical Origins and Evolution

United States Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938

The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) of 1938 established the federal requirement for time-and-a-half overtime pay in the , mandating compensation at one and one-half times the regular rate for hours worked beyond 44 per week, effective October 24, 1938. This threshold was scheduled to decrease to 42 hours after October 24, 1939, and to 40 hours after October 24, 1940, applying initially to approximately 11 to 12 million workers in industries engaged in interstate , such as and . The provision aimed to deter employers from relying on extended shifts for a small number of employees, thereby promoting broader employment during the by increasing the marginal cost of overtime labor. Enacted on June 25, 1938, amid widespread unemployment exceeding 17% and industrial practices where some factory workers endured shifts over 60 hours weekly prior to Depression-induced cutbacks, the FLSA responded to documented abuses in sectors like textiles and steel. Secretary of Labor , the in a U.S. presidential cabinet, played a central role in advocating for the bill, drawing from her experience with labor reforms and pushing for standards to protect vulnerable workers from exploitation. President supported its passage as part of efforts to stabilize the economy and regulate labor conditions previously left to states with inconsistent enforcement. Business associations, including the and retail trade groups, opposed the FLSA, arguing it would raise operational costs and reduce competitiveness, with lobbying efforts seeking exemptions for affected industries. , concerned about impacts on low-wage and textiles in their regions, joined Republicans in diluting the bill's scope during congressional debates. Post-enactment data from the indicate the average workweek declined from approximately 37.6 hours in 1938 to 36.6 hours in 1939, reflecting both the disincentive and ongoing economic slack, though the policy's primary effect was to formalize shorter standard hours in covered sectors.

Post-WWII Developments and International Influences

During , the Fair Labor Standards Act's (FLSA) overtime requirements were not formally suspended, but enforcement priorities shifted to accommodate war production demands, with premium pay serving as an incentive for extended hours amid labor shortages and wage stabilization efforts. The War Overtime Pay Act of 1943 provided mechanisms for premium compensation in defense-related contracts while temporarily suspending certain non-essential provisions, such as the Saturday half-holiday rule, to maximize output without broadly exempting overtime premiums. This flexibility contributed to significant real wage gains through overtime, with manufacturing workers' weekly earnings rising approximately 50% from 1939 to 1944 after accounting for and base wage controls. In the post-war period, U.S. courts solidified the FLSA's framework, including its overtime mandates. The in United States v. Darby (1941) ruled the Act constitutional under the , rejecting Tenth Amendment challenges and affirming federal authority over interstate labor standards. Further decisions through the 1940s and 1950s upheld overtime provisions against employer suits alleging overreach, embedding time-and-a-half as a durable federal norm despite ongoing litigation over exemptions and calculations. The FLSA's model exerted indirect influence on global standards via the International Labour Organization (ILO), whose Hours of Work (Industry) Convention, 1919 (No. 1), limited weekly hours to 48 and promoted compensatory mechanisms for excess work, shaping post-WWII reforms in ratifying nations. While not prescribing a uniform 1.5x premium, ILO principles encouraged overtime surcharges—often 25% to 100% above base rates—to deter overuse and protect workers, influencing Commonwealth arbitration systems. In Australia, post-war industrial awards under the Conciliation and Arbitration Commission frequently incorporated time-and-a-half for hours beyond 40 weekly, adapting U.S.-inspired premiums to local wage-fixing tribunals without statutory uniformity. Amid 1970s , U.S. policy discussions scrutinized FLSA thresholds for erosion but preserved the 1.5x rate, with 1974 amendments expanding coverage to additional sectors while linking overtime value to periodic hikes that outpaced early-decade spikes. No fundamental revisions to the premium multiplier occurred, as focus remained on exemption salary levels rather than core incentives, reflecting entrenched acceptance of the post-war structure.

Legal Requirements by Jurisdiction

United States Federal and State Variations

Under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), non-exempt employees of covered employers must receive overtime compensation at a rate of at least one-and-a-half times their regular rate for all hours worked in excess of 40 in a workweek. The workweek is defined as a fixed period of 168 hours, beginning on any day and at any hour, with no averaging across weeks permitted. Exemptions from overtime apply to certain executive, administrative, professional, and other categories of employees who meet specific duties tests and earn at least $684 per week ($35,568 annually) in salary, a threshold established in 2019 and maintained after a 2024 Department of Labor rule attempting increases to $43,888 and higher levels was by federal court in late 2024. State laws often mirror requirements but introduce variations, typically applying the more protective standard. California, for example, requires time-and-a-half pay after 8 hours in a workday or 40 in a workweek, with double time after 12 hours in a day or on the seventh consecutive day. Similar daily overtime thresholds exist in and after 8 hours per day. adheres to the federal weekly 40-hour threshold for time-and-a-half without a general daily mandate, though it imposes higher salary thresholds for exemptions—$1,320 per week for executive and administrative roles as of 2025—and additional rules like spread-of-hours pay in for shifts exceeding 10 hours. States may also add premiums beyond standard overtime, such as for holidays or weekends, but these are distinct from the core time-and-a-half requirement unless triggering hours; for instance, some jurisdictions mandate premium rates for work on Sundays or spread-of-hours exceeding 10-12 hours daily. Exemptions under state can diverge, with some states rejecting exemptions for certain occupations or requiring independent duties and tests, potentially extending coverage to workers classified as exempt federally. Misclassification of employees as exempt or contractors remains a noted compliance issue, as highlighted by the Department of Labor, often resulting in denied eligibility.

New Zealand Holiday and Contractual Provisions

Under the Holidays Act 2003, employees in who work on a that falls on a day they would ordinarily work are entitled to a minimum of time-and-a-half their relevant daily pay for the hours worked, in addition to receiving an alternative holiday. This statutory premium applies specifically to the 12 public holidays recognized annually, such as on February 6 and on April 25, but excludes work on alternative holidays taken in lieu. The provision aims to compensate for forgoing a day of rest, with calculations based on average daily pay over the prior 13 weeks if variable. New Zealand employment law imposes no statutory requirement for time-and-a-half or any premium pay for beyond an employee's ordinary hours, which are typically capped at 40 per week in agreements under the Employment Relations Act 2000. Instead, any arrangements, including premium rates like time-and-a-half after eight hours in a shift or 40 hours weekly, must be negotiated and specified in individual or collective employment agreements. Such provisions appear in sector-specific collective agreements, for instance in healthcare or , where unions have secured time-and-a-half for excess hours, but they remain voluntary and unenforceable absent agreement. Empirical data from indicates that full-time employees average approximately 37 paid hours per week at their main job, with often undertaken voluntarily due to the absence of mandates. This reflects a labor emphasizing flexibility, where employers and employees bargain terms suited to needs rather than uniform statutory premiums. Reviews of from 2023 to 2025, including proposed replacements for the Holidays Act, have not introduced general premiums despite advocacy from unions for broader protections. Changes have focused on clarifying calculations and minimum wages—rising to NZ$23.50 per hour for adults from April 2025—while preserving contractual discretion for to maintain -driven arrangements.

Other Selected Countries and Global Variations

In , the mandates pay at 1.5 times the ordinary hourly rate for hours worked beyond the standard 38-hour weekly ordinary hours, with additional penalty rates applying for on Sundays or public holidays that can exceed 1.5 times. This framework applies to most award-covered employees, though enterprise agreements may vary specifics while maintaining minimum protections. Canada's overtime provisions vary by province, lacking a uniform federal standard for non-federally regulated workers; in , for instance, employees receive 1.5 times their regular rate for hours exceeding 44 per week, calculated on a weekly basis without daily overtime thresholds. Provinces like and set thresholds at 40 hours weekly for 1.5 times pay, while others such as use 48 hours, reflecting decentralized labor regulation influenced by regional economic conditions. In Europe, fixed 1.5-times premiums are uncommon, with France requiring a minimum 25% premium for the first eight overtime hours weekly (beyond the 35-hour standard week) and 50% thereafter, subject to annual caps of 220 overtime hours unless collective agreements allow more. Germany imposes no statutory overtime premium, relying instead on collective bargaining or works council agreements that typically provide 25% surcharges or compensatory time off in lieu, prioritizing flexibility over mandatory cash payments. Many EU countries favor time-off equivalents over premiums to align with directives emphasizing work-life balance, such as the EU Working Time Directive's 48-hour weekly average limit. Among developing economies, mandates double the ordinary wage rate (2 times) for under the Factories Act, 1948, applicable to hours beyond nine daily or 48 weekly in manufacturing settings, with similar doubles under state Shops and Establishments Acts for non-factory workers. China's Labor Law stipulates 1.5 times the hourly rate for on standard workdays, capped at three hours daily and 36 monthly, escalating to 2 times for rest days and 3 times for holidays, though enforcement varies amid reports of widespread non-compliance in high-growth sectors. These variations underscore how premiums often scale with density and formal sector prevalence—stricter in -strong contexts like Australia's awards or India's factories—yet empirical data from reports indicate no consistent link to broader welfare improvements, as evasion rises in informal economies.

Economic Rationale and Theoretical Foundations

Labor Protection Objectives

The implementation of time-and-a-half pay for overtime hours seeks to safeguard workers from the adverse effects of by requiring employers to compensate for the elevated risks associated with extended shifts, such as increased and . This premium rate is intended to internalize the externalities of , ensuring that the additional costs— including diminished and impairments—are borne by the employer rather than subsidized through uncompensated worker strain. Policymakers have historically viewed this mechanism as a means to promote equitable distribution of work hours, aligning incentives toward sustainable labor practices over unchecked extension of individual workloads. Prior to widespread overtime regulations, low-skilled workers in industries like often endured 12-hour or longer daily shifts without premium compensation, fostering conditions ripe for and suppressing overall levels. The time-and-a-half standard emerged as a targeted to elevate effective hourly earnings for these vulnerable groups, countering the norm of extended unpaid or underpaid labor that prioritized output over worker . By imposing a higher on , the aims to deter reliance on elongated shifts, theoretically prompting employers to distribute hours across a broader pool of employees in labor markets responsive to incentives. This approach underscores a commitment to mitigating historical patterns where excessive hours contributed to broader by concentrating work among fewer individuals.

First-Principles Analysis of Incentives

The time-and-a-half premium for overtime hours fundamentally raises the of labor beyond the standard weekly threshold, creating a discontinuous that influences employer optimization at the intensive labor margin. This elevated cost per additional hour—typically 50% above the —prompts firms to substitute away from extended shifts toward alternatives that avoid the penalty, such as expanding headcount at straight-time rates or accelerating adoption of labor-substituting technologies like . to lower-regulation environments or reclassifying roles to salaried exemptions, which bypass overtime mandates, similarly emerge as rational responses to minimize total labor expenditures relative to output demands. From the worker perspective, the premium boosts the effective wage for supra-threshold hours, thereby incentivizing greater supply of labor by elevating its attractiveness against , second jobs, or non-work pursuits, assuming individual utility maximization. Regulatory frameworks, however, impose voluntary participation norms and often cap compulsory , preserving worker choice and undermining claims of systemic where employers dictate hours without consent. This structure aligns extra-hour decisions with personal valuation rather than presumed asymmetries, as competitive labor markets enable options that discipline exploitative practices. The premium's design presumes no baseline market efficiency, yet first-principles scrutiny reveals it as a to price-mediated allocation unless substantiated by externalities like uncompensated health decrements from —costs workers might discount in present-biased choices. In monopsony narratives, the mandate ostensibly corrects under-remuneration, but evidence of pervasive market power remains context-specific and contested in dynamic economies; without it, the policy elevates costs artificially, potentially curtailing mutually beneficial extended-hour contracts.

Debates, Criticisms, and Empirical Impacts

Arguments for Expansion and Worker Protections

Advocates for broadening overtime protections under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) maintain that raising the salary threshold for , administrative, and exemptions would restore intended safeguards for lower-paid salaried workers, enabling overtime eligibility at time-and-a-half rates for hours exceeding 40 per week. The U.S. Department of Labor's final rule issued in April 2024 sought to implement this by increasing the annual salary threshold from $35,568 to $43,888 effective July 1, 2024, and to $58,656 effective January 1, 2025, with provisions for automatic updates every three years based on wage data. This adjustment was projected to extend protections to about 4 million workers, primarily in roles like office clerks and supervisors, who often work extended hours without premium pay under current exemptions. Labor organizations and policy analysts aligned with expansion efforts argue that such changes address wage stagnation by increasing take-home pay for overtime labor, thereby bolstering and middle-class stability amid rising living costs. They posit that exempt status frequently results in uncompensated long hours, diluting workers' effective hourly earnings—sometimes estimated at 10-20% below comparable non-exempt rates when total compensation is adjusted for actual hours worked—while shifting economic burdens onto employees rather than employers. These proponents frame the policy as a corrective to imbalances favoring corporate interests, where firms exploit exemptions to minimize labor costs without corresponding gains. Expansion supporters further claim that mandated overtime premiums discourage excessive scheduling, reducing risks of , , and associated health impairments from prolonged workweeks. Meta-analyses and cohort studies indicate that working beyond standard hours correlates with elevated incidence and , with unpaid exacerbating these effects through sustained physiological strain. However, while observational data supports links between long hours and adverse outcomes, randomized controlled trials demonstrating net welfare improvements from overtime expansions—accounting for potential employer responses like reduced base hiring—are absent, limiting causal inferences. Sources advancing these pro-regulation views, such as the Department of Labor under the Biden administration and the , often reflect institutional priorities favoring worker-side interventions, though their projections draw from labor surveys and economic modeling.

Market Distortions, Employment Effects, and Evasion

Overtime pay mandates, such as time-and-a-half requirements, distort labor markets by artificially inflating the of labor beyond standard weekly thresholds, prompting employers to substitute away from hours toward alternative scheduling or hiring practices that may not align with efficient . This structure encourages firms to limit employee hours to just below the overtime trigger—often 40 hours per week—rather than expanding work time at the premium rate, thereby compressing total labor input and potentially reducing overall opportunities when labor is inelastic. From a causal perspective, these regulations overlook voluntary contractual arrangements where workers might accept straight-time pay for additional hours in exchange for or flexibility, leading to suboptimal outcomes like increased part-time or underutilization of labor , particularly in sectors with fluctuating . Employment effects manifest in reduced hiring, especially for low-skill or entry-level positions, as the premium pay requirement raises the effective cost of extending shifts or retaining workers during peak periods, favoring , , or arrangements where individuals hold multiple part-time roles across employers to circumvent single-job thresholds. Empirical analyses indicate that expanding overtime coverage correlates with net headcount losses, as firms adjust by reclassifying roles or capping hours to avoid premiums, which disproportionately impacts younger or less experienced workers who bear the brunt of constrained job creation. Critics from -oriented perspectives argue that such mandates interfere with labor signals, harming low-skill hiring by embedding rigid cost structures that deter expansions, as employers anticipate higher liabilities without corresponding gains. Evasion tactics are prevalent, including widespread misclassification of employees as exempt executives, administrators, or independent contractors to sidestep obligations, a practice the U.S. Department of Labor identifies as a serious and recurring issue that deprives workers of entitled premiums while shifting risks to employers through audits and penalties. Employers may also substitute compensatory time off for cash pay where permissible, particularly in contexts, or manipulate scheduling to average hours over longer periods, reducing the incidence of premium-eligible work. Proposals in , such as simplifying exemption criteria, permitting compensatory time substitutions, and allowing calculations over biweekly or longer cycles, have drawn criticism for potentially eroding worker protections but are defended as measures to curtail administrative burdens estimated in billions annually by easing without mandating pay premiums. These approaches reflect a view that rigid mandates foster evasion by prioritizing regulatory avoidance over genuine labor protections, underscoring the tension between enforced premiums and adaptive market responses.

Evidence from Studies on Wages, Hours, and Productivity

Empirical studies on U.S. regulations, including time-and-a-half premiums under the Fair Labor Standards Act, indicate short-term boosts of 10-15% for workers in overtime-eligible roles who retain such hours, primarily through the premium multiplier on affected pay. However, these gains are offset by employer responses that curtail usage, resulting in total hours worked declining by 1-3% on average, with weekly earnings showing limited net increase. Analyses synthesizing decades of data, such as those reviewing state and federal variations, find no robust link between premiums and broader growth, as firms redistribute hours or reclassify roles to evade costs. Employment outcomes reveal adverse effects on and low-skill positions from and hours mandates. The FLSA's implementation correlated with a 20-30% drop in teenage in covered industries, as employers reduced hiring of inexperienced workers to limit exposure to premiums and minimums, shifting toward more productive adult labor. Subsequent research confirms that such regulations exacerbate job scarcity for entry-level groups, with disemployment elasticities estimated at 0.1-0.3 for low-wage , without commensurate gains in overall labor force participation. Assertions that overtime premiums safeguard health by curbing accidents lack causal substantiation. Observational data links prolonged hours to elevated risks, with overtime schedules associated with 61% higher hazard rates in national samples, driven by accumulation. Yet, no rigorous studies isolate the premium mechanism as reducing incidents beyond baseline scheduling adjustments or safety protocols, suggesting protective effects remain unproven empirically. On productivity, firms adapt to premium-induced constraints via investments and technological substitutions, sustaining output without proportional hour expansions. U.S. shows minimal aggregate losses, as employers optimize staffing and to offset costs. Cross-nationally, France's 1998 35-hour mandate—stricter than U.S. norms—yielded no gains and imposed fiscal burdens equivalent to 0.3-0.4% of GDP annually, correlating with persistently above 8% (versus U.S. averages of 5-6% post-2000), without superior per-worker output. These patterns underscore over inherent productivity enhancement from hour limits.

Implementation Challenges and Compliance

Exemptions, Thresholds, and Misclassification Risks

Under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), exemptions from pay requirements, including time-and-a-half for hours over 40 in a workweek, primarily apply to , administrative, and (EAP) employees who meet both a salary basis test and a duties test. The salary basis test requires payment of a fixed not subject to reductions based on hours worked, currently at a minimum of $684 per week ($35,568 annually), excluding board, lodging, or other facilities. The duties test evaluates whether the employee's primary duty involves managerial functions (), office or non-manual work directly related to or general operations (administrative), or advanced knowledge in a field of science or learning (), with specific criteria outlined in 29 CFR Part 541. Highly compensated employees face a higher annual threshold of $107,432 but a simplified duties test, though this was also affected by recent regulatory changes. Federal salary thresholds have been subject to attempted updates, such as the 2016 Department of Labor rule aiming to raise the weekly minimum to $913 ($47,476 annually), which was enjoined nationwide by a federal court before implementation, citing exceedance of statutory authority. A 2024 rule increased the threshold to $844 per week ($43,888 annually) effective , 2024, with a planned escalation to $1,128 per week ($58,656 annually) on , 2025, and automatic updates every three years tied to ; however, a district court vacated the rule in November 2024, reverting thresholds to prior levels amid ongoing appeals and challenges questioning the Department's rulemaking power. To compare salaried employees to thresholds, employers often convert annual salary by dividing by 2,080 hours (40 hours/week × 52 weeks), yielding an effective hourly rate; failure to meet the weekly salary floor disqualifies exemption regardless of title or actual hours. States like impose stricter standards, requiring exempt employees to earn at least twice the state (e.g., $66,560 annually for larger employers in 2024) and pass a quantitative duties test where over 50% of time must involve exempt tasks, contrasting the federal qualitative "primary duty" emphasis. Misclassification of non-exempt employees as exempt—often through improper application of duties tests or salary shortfalls—exposes employers to significant risks from Department of Labor (DOL) audits and private lawsuits. Audits can result in liability for back pay covering two years (or three for willful violations), plus doubling the owed amount, and civil penalties up to $2,074 per willful violation under FLSA Section 16(e). High-profile cases have yielded multimillion-dollar settlements; for instance, DOL recoveries for misclassification often exceed $1 million per investigation involving systemic errors. Employers face heightened scrutiny in industries like and , where duties tests fail due to non-exempt tasks dominating workloads, amplifying evasion incentives but triggering enforcement actions that prioritize empirical reviews over self-reported classifications.

Enforcement Mechanisms and Recent Regulatory Changes

In the United States, the Department of Labor's Wage and Hour Division (WHD) primarily enforces provisions under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) through a combination of worker-initiated complaints, which account for the majority of cases, and proactive directed investigations or audits targeting industries with high violation risks, such as and . Upon finding violations, the WHD orders payment of back wages and premiums, imposes civil money penalties of up to $1,149 per willful or repeated violation, and may seek equivalent to the unpaid amounts unless the employer demonstrates . State attorneys general supplement federal efforts by pursuing violations under parallel state wage laws, with some jurisdictions like authorizing —three times the unpaid —for proven claims, enhancing deterrence beyond federal . Recent regulatory updates to FLSA overtime eligibility thresholds have centered on the salary level test for exempt , administrative, and employees. A 2019 rule, effective January 1, 2020, raised the annual threshold to $35,568 (or $684 weekly), delaying further automatic increases that were later rescinded amid legal challenges. In April 2024, the Department of Labor finalized a rule under the Biden administration to phase in higher thresholds—$43,888 annually starting July 1, 2024, and $58,656 on January 1, 2025—with provisions for triennial updates tied to wage growth; however, a court vacated the rule in November 2024, ruling it exceeded statutory authority and inadequately considered compliance burdens on small businesses, reinstating the 2020 levels pending appeal. Enforcement faces systemic challenges from resource constraints, including chronic understaffing at the WHD, which conducted only 879 farm-related investigations in 2022 despite widespread issues in , contributing to low overall as covers just a of the 150 million-worker labor force. Internationally, regulations in developing countries suffer from weaker institutional capacity, with informal sectors—often comprising 50-80% of —facilitating widespread evasion through unregistered work and lax monitoring, as formal prioritizes tax collection over labor standards.

References

  1. [1]
    29 CFR Part 778 -- Overtime Compensation - eCFR
    If the employee is employed solely on a weekly salary basis, the regular hourly rate of pay, on which time and a half must be paid, is computed by dividing ...
  2. [2]
    The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA): An Overview - Congress.gov
    Mar 8, 2023 · The FLSA requires employers to pay at least time-and-a-half to covered, nonexempt employees who work more than 40 hours in a week at a given job ...
  3. [3]
    [PDF] Overtime - U.S. Department of Labor
    don't have to pay for overtime, it means that overtime is still due at time and a half. However it's captured under FLSA Section 7 overtime requirements ...
  4. [4]
    From the New Deal to a New Century: The History of Overtime
    Feb 25, 2021 · The law set the minimum wage at 25 cents an hour and overtime pay at time and half for hours worked beyond a 44-hour workweek.
  5. [5]
    U.S. overtime rules: past, present, and future | Reuters
    Apr 26, 2023 · April 26, 2023 - Workweek and overtime laws in the United States have significantly evolved since their 19th century inception.
  6. [6]
    State Minimum Wage Laws - U.S. Department of Labor
    Premium Pay After Designated Hours: Daily - 8, Weekly – 40, and on statutory rest day (time-and-a-half). Employees entitled to greater rights or benefits ...
  7. [7]
    Field Operations Handbook - Chapter 32 | U.S. Department of Labor
    An otherwise valid section 7(f) contract will not be invalidated because of the failure to pay time and a half for the hours in excess of the contract ...
  8. [8]
    Time and a Half Definition and how to calculate it | Sage Advice US
    Time and a half refers to an increased rate of pay typically reserved for hours worked overtime or those that exceed the 40-hour work week.
  9. [9]
    Time and a Half and How To Calculate It (With Examples) - Indeed
    Mar 23, 2025 · To calculate time and a half, multiply an employee's hourly rate by 1.5. The formula is simple: Time and a Half = Standard Hourly Rate x 1.5.
  10. [10]
    Time and a Half | How Do You Calculate Overtime? - ADP
    Multiply the regular rate of pay by time and a half (1.5) to get the overtime rate; Multiply the overtime rate by the amount of overtime hours worked. This ...
  11. [11]
    What Is Time and a Half Pay, and Who Qualifies for It?
    Mar 18, 2025 · The FLSA requires that you pay time and a half to qualifying employees who work more than 40 hours in a workweek. But there are also overtime ...
  12. [12]
    Fact Sheet #23: Overtime Pay Requirements of the FLSA
    The employee is then due additional overtime computed by multiplying the 5 overtime hours by one-half the regular rate of pay ($4.50 x 5 = $22.50). Overtime Pay ...
  13. [13]
    Straight-Time Pay - BambooHR
    Time and a half pay means an employee is paid 1.5 times their regular hourly rate for overtime. So, if an employee is contracted to work seven hours a day, and ...How is straight-time pay... · Are there laws that regulate...
  14. [14]
    Overtime Pay | U.S. Department of Labor
    Employees covered by the Act must receive overtime pay for hours worked over 40 in a workweek at a rate not less than time and one-half their regular rates of ...General Guidance · Fact Sheets · Law · Earnings thresholds
  15. [15]
    Overtime - California Department of Industrial Relations
    For each overtime hour worked you are entitled to an additional one-half the regular rate for hours requiring time and one-half, and to the full rate for hours ...Exemptions · DLSE - Glossary · Exceptions to the general... · Agricultural Workers
  16. [16]
    "Double Time" vs "Overtime" - The Difference in California
    Feb 28, 2025 · Extra pay for non-exempt employees, Work that triggers extra pay in California ; Time-and-a-half pay (“overtime pay”). more than 8 hours up to 12 ...
  17. [17]
    Double Time vs Overtime vs Time And A Half: Key Differences ...
    Sep 22, 2025 · Double time and a half refers to a pay rate of 2.5 times an employee's standard hourly wage. This enhanced rate is typically offered for working ...
  18. [18]
    Double Time vs Overtime vs Time And A Half: What's The Difference?
    Mar 9, 2023 · Time and a half is the overtime rate that an employee receives for working overtime. Overtime, on the other hand, refers to the additional hours worked beyond ...Time And A Half · Overtime Rules · Double Time Rules
  19. [19]
    Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938: Maximum Struggle for a Minimum ...
    It banned oppressive child labor and set the minimum hourly wage at 25 cents, and the maximum workweek at 44 hours.
  20. [20]
    [PDF] hours of work and the fair labor standards act
    " The Act mandated that time and half be paid for overtime after 44 hours beginning October 24, 1938, after. 42 hours beginning October 24, 1939, and after ...Missing: context | Show results with:context
  21. [21]
    [PDF] Modernizing the Overtime Provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act
    At the time of its passage, the Act affected approximately eleven to twelve million workers,3 primarily by reducing the number of hours worked. At the inception ...
  22. [22]
    [PDF] Regulation of Wages and Hours Prior to 1938
    Passage of the federal wage and hour bill did not represent a sharp break with laissez faire in this field. Rather did that law mark a logical step in a ...<|separator|>
  23. [23]
    Her Life - Frances Perkins Center
    Frances Perkins, FDR's Secretary of Labor and the first woman to serve as a cabinet secretary, was the driving force behind the New Deal.
  24. [24]
    Fair Labor Standards Act Signed - This Month in Business History
    After the bill was debated and voted on, it was signed by President Roosevelt and became effective on October 24, 1938. It contained provisions related to hours ...
  25. [25]
    [PDF] the labor movement and the Fair Labor Standards Act
    And indeed it has been, starting early in the 19th Century when the earli- est efforts to enact maximum hours legislation took place at the State level, to the ...
  26. [26]
    Letter Opposing the Fair Labor Standards Act - History, Art & Archives
    Retail bakeries were one of many industries that appealed to Congress to reject the act or to ask for an exception to its provisions. Some of the lobbying was ...
  27. [27]
    Hours of Work and the Fair Labor Standards Act - jstor
    When the Fair Labor Standards Act was first implemented, a 5% reduction in the length of the standard workweek reduced by at least.
  28. [28]
    [PDF] War and Postwar Wages, Prices, and Hours, 1914-23 and 1939-44
    Increases far smaller occurred from 1939 to 1944, and yet factors other than basic wage-rate changes, especially premium pay ments for overtime, were much more ...
  29. [29]
    War Overtime Pay Act of 1943 :: Title 50 - 3751) - US Code :: Justia
    Section 1406, act May 7, 1943, ch. 93, §6, 57 Stat. 77, related to suspension of the Saturday half-holiday rule. Section 1407, act May 7, ...
  30. [30]
    The Way We Won: America's Economic Breakthrough During World ...
    Oct 1, 1992 · BY 1944, as a result of wage increases and overtime pay, real weekly wages before taxes in manufacturing were 50 percent higher than in 1939.Missing: international | Show results with:international<|control11|><|separator|>
  31. [31]
    United States v. Darby | 312 U.S. 100 (1941)
    The Supreme Court ruled the Fair Labor Standards Act constitutional, as it relates to interstate commerce and provides uniform labor standards. The Act sets ...Missing: 1950s | Show results with:1950s
  32. [32]
    Cases from 1940-1955 | Oyez
    A case in which the Court held that the Fair Labor Standards Act complied with the Commerce Clause, giving Congress the ability to regulate interstate commerce.
  33. [33]
    [PDF] The History of the Australian Minimum Wage - Fair Work Commission
    Mar 23, 2023 · The level of the minimum wage reflected that debate, with a lower level of minimum wage for unskilled labourers initially set by tribunals.Missing: premiums | Show results with:premiums
  34. [34]
    A Brief History: The U.S. Department of Labor
    Amendments to the FLSA raised the minimum wage from $2.30 to $3.35 an hour by January 1, 1981, and farm workers were covered for the first time. To strengthen ...Missing: overtime | Show results with:overtime
  35. [35]
    [PDF] Compensation from World War II through the Great Society
    Jan 30, 2003 · Additionally, payments for overtime afforded extra income to workers, without violating the limits on hourly wage payments. During the late ...
  36. [36]
    Earnings thresholds for the Executive, Administrative, and ...
    Earnings thresholds for the Executive, Administrative, and Professional exemption from minimum wage and overtime protections under the FLSA.
  37. [37]
    Federal Court Strikes Down Labor Department's Overtime Rule ...
    Dec 17, 2024 · The final rule would have raised the minimum salary level to $58,656 in January 2025. Under the order, the minimum salary threshold will revert ...
  38. [38]
    How Do State Overtime Pay Rules Differ from Federal Law? - SHRM
    Oct 10, 2017 · In Alaska, California and Nevada, employers must pay overtime premiums for any hours worked beyond eight in a day. California workers also must ...
  39. [39]
    Understanding State Overtime Rules, Laws and Regulations
    Sep 16, 2025 · Daily and weekly overtime: Overtime after 8 hours/day, 40 hours/week, or first 8 hours on the 7th consecutive day; double time after 12 hours/ ...
  40. [40]
    New York Overtime Law - The Complete Guide for 2025
    Jul 4, 2025 · According to New York Overtime Law, employers must typically pay employees 1.5 times the regular rate of pay for all time worked over 40 hours in a work week.
  41. [41]
    State Overtime Laws Chart - Bloomberg Law
    Mar 18, 2024 · ... in the American workforce. The FLSA requires nonexempt employees to be paid time-and-a-half for all time worked that exceeds 40 hours in a ...
  42. [42]
    Overtime Laws by State | What Employers Need to Know - ADP
    The premium overtime pay rate is one and one-half times the regular pay rate, commonly called “time and a half.” ADP's cloud-based time tracking and ...
  43. [43]
    Department of Labor Issues Guidance on Misclassification of ...
    Jul 16, 2015 · The DOL considers the misclassification of workers as independent contractors to be a serious national issue depriving workers of overtime pay ...
  44. [44]
    Public holiday pay | Employment New Zealand
    Dec 4, 2024 · Under the Holidays Act 2003, the minimum Jane will get paid for working a public holiday is time-and-a-half, which is $25 x 1.5 = $37.50 an hour ...
  45. [45]
    Holidays Act 2003 - New Zealand Legislation
    An employer may use an employee's average daily pay for the purposes of calculating payment for a public holiday, an alternative holiday, sick leave, ...
  46. [46]
    Working overtime or extra shifts - Employment New Zealand
    Mar 1, 2024 · Paying employees for working overtime or extra shift needs to be agreed to by the employer and employee and included in the employment agreement.Pay For Working Overtime Or... · Having To Be Available For... · Saying 'no' To Work
  47. [47]
    Overtime Pay | Definition, Rates & Laws | Peninsula NZ Guide
    Nov 6, 2023 · Overtime pay is not required by law in New Zealand. Employers and employees can agree on an overtime rate, but there is no legal requirement in ...
  48. [48]
    Overtime Pay - Peninsula NZ
    Sep 3, 2025 · There is no legislation governing overtime pay in New Zealand. However, working overtime is a part of many employment arrangements.
  49. [49]
    8-hour workday remains commonplace in New Zealand | Stats NZ
    Oct 19, 2023 · Employees usually worked an average of 37 hours per week at their main job in the June 2023 quarter – fewer than employers, who reported working ...
  50. [50]
    Holidays Act 2003 to be replaced by a new Employment Leave Act
    Sep 26, 2025 · Employees also receive a whole alternative holiday and get paid time and a half for the hours they work. Under the proposal, if an employee ...
  51. [51]
    Working Overtime: What You Need To Know (2025 Updated)
    Feb 4, 2025 · It is crucial to understand the legal framework surrounding overtime in New Zealand, particularly as workplace standards have evolved in 2025.
  52. [52]
    Guide to Employment Law Updates in 2023-24 | LegalVision NZ
    Mar 26, 2025 · This article discusses the key updates to New Zealand employment law that you need to be aware of if you run a business.Missing: provisions | Show results with:provisions
  53. [53]
    Overtime pay - Fair Work Ombudsman
    Overtime is work performed outside the ordinary hours listed in an award or agreement. Overtime is usually paid at a higher rate.
  54. [54]
    Australia Overtime Laws | February 29, 2024 - Jibble
    Rating 4.9 (1,485) · Free · Business/ProductivityThe overtime rate in Australia is 1.5 times the employee's hourly rate. This rate may, however, vary depending on a specific industry, and is often calculated ...Australia Overtime Rates · Overtime Limitations for... · Overtime for Piece Rates...
  55. [55]
    When overtime applies - Fair Work Ombudsman
    Find out whether employees have to work overtime when asked, when overtime pay rates apply and information on overtime rules and WHS issues.
  56. [56]
    https://www.ontario.ca/document/your-guide-employment-standards-act-0/overtime-pay
  57. [57]
    Rules of overtime pay in Canada by province - QuickBooks - Intuit
    Dec 19, 2024 · Overtime rules in Ontario · Overtime threshold: Employees are entitled to overtime pay for hours worked beyond 44 hours in a week. · Pay rate: The ...
  58. [58]
    What Are the Overtime Rules in Canada? - Canadian Payroll Services
    The general threshold for overtime in Canada is 40 hours per week but is higher in Ontario (44), Nova Scotia (48), and PEI (48).Provincial Overtime Rules in... · Who Are Exempt and Non...
  59. [59]
    Understanding the 35-Hour Workweek and Overtime Rules in France
    Oct 21, 2024 · The overtime pay rates are as follows: 25% increase: For the first 8 hours of overtime (i.e., hours 36 to 43), employees receive a 25% pay ...Missing: premium | Show results with:premium
  60. [60]
    Overtime Law in France - Complete Guide 2024 - TimeCamp Statistics
    Rating 4.7 (563) · Free · Business/ProductivityHow can I calculate my overtime pay? Overtime pay is typically calculated at a rate of 25% more for the first eight hours of overtime and 50% thereafter.
  61. [61]
    Working conditions & Working hours in Germany - L&E Global
    Oct 22, 2024 · Overtime pay and overtime surcharges are not expressively regulated by law, but are subject to the employment agreement, collective bargaining ...Working Conditions In... · Minimum Working Conditions · Salary
  62. [62]
    Employment laws in Germany: compliance guide - Remote
    Germany has no statutory mandate on overtime compensation. However, regulations require employers to document all employee overtime hours as well as hours ...Understanding key labor laws... · Statutory employment rights in...
  63. [63]
    Germany Overtime Laws: A Guide to Regulations - Safeguard Global
    Nov 9, 2021 · Typically, it can't exceed more than 10% to 25% of an employee's regular weekly or monthly hours. Tips for employers. For employers that expect ...Germany overtime laws · The maximum workweek · Disability protections and...
  64. [64]
    https://www.wisemonk.io/blogs/overtime-laws-in-india
  65. [65]
    Overtime Pay Calculation Formula in India | Guide for HRs [2024]
    Sep 19, 2024 · The Factories Act, 1948: Under this law, if a worker works beyond 9 hours a day or 48 hours a week, it is considered overtime. To compensate for ...Understanding Overtime Pay... · What Are the General Methods... · Wrapping Up
  66. [66]
    Overtime in China - MSA Advisory
    Apr 9, 2024 · Overtime in China pays 150% for weekdays, 200% for weekends, and up to 300% for holidays, with a max of 36 hours per month. Daily work hours ...
  67. [67]
    Overtime policy in China | INS Global
    Any work that exceeds 8 hours per normal work day must be paid at 1.5 times of the employee's contractually agreed to hourly wage. Any hours worked on a weekend ...
  68. [68]
    Understanding Overtime Payment: A Comprehensive Guide - HROne
    Apr 10, 2025 · Overtime pay in China is 150% for workday, 200% for rest day, and 300% for holidays. Overtime is limited to 3 hours/day and 36 hours/month. ...
  69. [69]
    EPI comments on DOL's proposed overtime rule
    Sep 8, 2023 · A main purpose of overtime pay protections is to recognize that employers should bear some cost for overwork – they can make the choice to pay ...
  70. [70]
    [PDF] Overtime work: A review of literature and initial empirical analysis
    The basic argument is that overtime premium should discourage firms to use overtime hours, because it generates a higher marginal cost for additional overtime ...
  71. [71]
    The Fair Labor Standards Act: A Historical Sketch of the Overtime ...
    "Overtime pay rewards work, and it reduces exploitation." The 40-hour workweek, he suggested, "creates jobs. Requiring time-and-a-half pay for overtime work ...
  72. [72]
    A Brief History of Overtime in the United States - Replicon
    Oct 18, 2022 · When the US began tracking workers' hours in 1890, it found the average workweek for a full-time manufacturing worker to be a staggering 100 hours!
  73. [73]
    The intellectual history of the minimum wage and overtime
    Sep 10, 2015 · This debate dates back to the early 20 th century, before the minimum wage even existed in the United States and when overtime pay was unheard of.
  74. [74]
    [PDF] The Overtime Pay Provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act
    It has long been recognized in the United States that excessive use of overtime hours may be partially responsible for continued high rates of unemployment.<|separator|>
  75. [75]
    [PDF] THE LABOR MARKET EFFECTS OF EXPANDING OVERTIME ...
    Oct 5, 2021 · In this framework, overtime coverage has no effect on wages and simply increases the overtime premium p.18 By raising the cost per hour of labor ...
  76. [76]
    [PDF] Some New Evidence on Overtime Use, Total Job Compensation ...
    In the labor demand model, the requirement of an overtime premium increases the price of labor in the overtime region, thereby reducing the ... labor cost impact ...
  77. [77]
    [PDF] Why Do Firms Pay an Overtime Premium? - EconStor
    employment expansion by raising marginal cost on the intensive relative to the extensive labour margin. Among the most stringent, comprehensively binding ...
  78. [78]
    The effect of overtime regulations on employment - IZA World of Labor
    By discouraging the use of overtime, such regulation can increase the standard hourly wage of some workers and encourage work sharing that increases employment, ...
  79. [79]
    Biden-Harris administration finalizes rule to increase compensation ...
    Apr 23, 2024 · Effective July 1, 2024, the salary threshold will increase to the equivalent of an annual salary of $43,888 and increase to $58,656 on Jan. 1, ...
  80. [80]
    Explaining the Department of Labor's new overtime rule that will ...
    Apr 23, 2024 · The 4.3 million represents 3.0% of workers subject to the FLSA. Expanding overtime protections is good for workers and manageable for employers.Missing: arguments | Show results with:arguments
  81. [81]
    The Effect of Long Working Hours and Overtime on Occupational ...
    There has been no subsequent meta-analysis examining the effects of long working hours on health or occupational health since 1997.
  82. [82]
    Working unpaid overtime linked with high stress and burnout
    This study shows that the more unpaid overtime hours worked, the more likely a worker is to report stress and burnout. Because of this, unpaid overtime may ...
  83. [83]
    [PDF] An Economic Analysis of Overtime Pay Regulations - Mercatus Center
    This paper examines the US Department of Labor's proposed regulation to extend overtime pay to employees with base salaries of $23,660 to $50,440.Missing: internalize | Show results with:internalize
  84. [84]
    Misclassification of Employees as Independent Contractors Under ...
    Misclassifying employees as independent contractors is a serious problem because misclassified employees may not receive the minimum wage and overtime pay to ...Myths About Misclassification · Final Rule · Fact Sheet 13
  85. [85]
    Project 2025 Would Cut Access to Overtime Pay
    Aug 8, 2024 · Project 2025 would make eligibility for overtime—also known as time-and-a-half pay—more confusing for workers to navigate and easier for ...
  86. [86]
    RELEASE: Project 2025 Would Cut Access to Overtime Pay
    Aug 8, 2024 · Let employers avoid time-and-a-half pay: Project 2025 proposes allowing employers to substitute time off for traditional time-and-a-half pay.
  87. [87]
    Wages and Hours Laws: What Do We Know? What Can Be Done?
    Dec 1, 2019 · The evidence shows that expansions of overtime laws do reduce wage rates (Trejo 1991). That is to be expected. Given a supply of labor to firms ...
  88. [88]
    [PDF] NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES WAGES AND HOURS LAWS
    Initially the FLSA of 1938 set the federal minimum wage at $0.25 (roughly $3.50 today, using the. Personal Consumption Expenditure deflator), to increase to ...
  89. [89]
    [PDF] 50 Years of Research on the Minimum Wage
    Feb 15, 1995 · Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938: Maximum Struggle for a Minimum Wage. ... Finds that in 1970 the minimum wage reduced employment of 14-15 year ...
  90. [90]
    The Negative Effects of Minimum Wage Laws - Cato Institute
    Minimum wages particularly stifle job opportunities for low-skill workers, youth, and minorities, which are the groups that policymakers are often trying to ...
  91. [91]
    The impact of overtime and long work hours on occupational injuries ...
    Working in jobs with overtime schedules was associated with a 61% higher injury hazard rate compared to jobs without overtime.
  92. [92]
    IMF Survey: France's 35-Hour Week: Benefit or Straitjacket?
    Sep 28, 2015 · France's 35-hour workweek appears to have had a mainly negative impact. It failed to create more jobs and generated a significant—and mostly ...
  93. [93]
    [PDF] The Impact of the 35 Hours Mandate in France on Employment and ...
    To ease the transition for small firms, the law reduced their overtime premium and increased their annual limit to overtime work compared with large firms.Missing: rules | Show results with:rules
  94. [94]
    Fact Sheet #17A: Exemption for Executive, Administrative ...
    This fact sheet provides general information on the exemption from minimum wage and overtime pay provided by Section 13(a)(1) of the FLSA.Exemption for Administrative... · Salary Basis Requirement · Professional ExemptionMissing: audits | Show results with:audits
  95. [95]
    U.S. District Court Vacates DOL Final Rule on FLSA Overtime ...
    Dec 12, 2024 · The threshold for highly compensated employees was $107,432 per year. The effective date for the final rule was July 1, 2024, but certain ...
  96. [96]
    Federal Court Turns back Time on DOL's Overtime Exemption ...
    Nov 19, 2024 · As of Friday, November 15, employers need not pay overtime to employees who are paid a salary of at least $684 per week and meet the other requirements.
  97. [97]
    Exempt vs. Nonexempt Employees | California Labor Law
    Strict Duties Test. To be considered an exempt employee in California, an employee must generally meet a strict duties test. For most exemptions, more than ...Missing: stricter | Show results with:stricter
  98. [98]
    Employers Face Misclassification Risk With Independent Contractor ...
    Jan 17, 2024 · Under the FLSA, an employer can be liable to the misclassified worker for back overtime for a two-year period (or for three years, if the ...
  99. [99]
    9 Consequences of Misclassifying Your 1099 Contractors - ADP
    Employers found in violation may incur massive penalties, including unpaid overtime costs and minimum wage deficits – plus liquidated damages equal to unpaid ...
  100. [100]
    Handy Reference Guide to the Fair Labor Standards Act
    Overtime must be paid at a rate of at least one and one-half times the employee's regular rate of pay for each hour worked in a workweek in excess of the ...Missing: understaffing | Show results with:understaffing
  101. [101]
    elaws - Fair Labor Standards Act Advisor
    Employers who willfully or repeatedly violate the minimum wage or overtime pay requirements are subject to a civil money penalty of up to $1,000 for each such ...Missing: treble | Show results with:treble
  102. [102]
    Employees in Maryland Can Now Get Treble Damages for Overtime ...
    Aug 22, 2014 · Employees who prove an entitlement to overtime pay can now seek an award of treble damages or three times the amount owed to them in unpaid overtime wages.
  103. [103]
    Federal District Court Vacates Biden's DOL Overtime Rule
    Nov 22, 2024 · The decision reinstates the salary thresholds in effect prior to the DOL's 2024 rule, which represent a nearly 65% decrease from the thresholds ...<|separator|>
  104. [104]
    Record-low number of federal wage and hour investigations of farms ...
    Aug 22, 2023 · Since 2000, investigations by the Department of Labor's Wage and Hour Division have plummeted by over 60%—from a high of 2,431 to only 879 in ...<|separator|>