Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part
Alec Marsh v. J. Alexander's LLC
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided September 6, 2017No. 15-15791, 15-15794, 15-16561, 15-16659, 16-15003, 16-15004, 16-15005, 16-15118, 16-16033Published
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partPaez, Circuit Judge
Contrary to the majority, I would defer to the Department of Labor’s (“DOL”) interpretation of 29 C.F.R. § 531.56(e), the tipped minimum wage regulation at issue in this case.1 Employees paid the tipped minimum wage for untipped work are underpaid.2 Recognizing this problem, the DOL issued guidance clarifying that under § 531.56(e), employers must pay their tipped employees the full minimum wage when such employees spend a substantial amount of time performing untipped work. Because the DOL’s guidance interpreted its own ambiguous regulation, and is neither plainly inconsistent with that…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Auer v. RobbinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Sandifer v. United States Steel Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2014
- United States v. Klinghoffer Bros. Realty Corp., Irving Jacobson and Albert KlinghofferCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1961
- Solis v. Lorraine Enterprises, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2014
- Fast v. Applebee's International, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2011
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.