COA affirms man not entitled to overtime pay

The Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed a man was not entitled to overtime pay because his contract specified as such during his employment.

Edward Skillman was hired by Ivy Tech Community College as a senior operations analyst in 2008, and was presented notice of his classification of an Administrative Exempt, or E-1, employee. His position required him to be on call after hours and he received an average of 11 after-hours calls per week. He didn’t request payment from Ivy Tech for overtime while he was employed there.

In 2013, Skillman left Ivy Tech, and calculated he was owed $108,000 in overtime for having to work on call. He filed a Federal Labor Standards Act claim, as well as state law claims under Indiana Minimum Wage Law and Wage Payment Act. The trial court dismissed the FLSA claim, and Ivy Tech was granted summary judgment on the state law claims. He appealed only the state law claims.

In its decision, the COA said it doesn’t matter that Skillman already had admitted to not receiving overtime when he took the job, because there was a more fundamental reason Ivy Tech should be granted summary judgment. Ivy Tech is excluded from the minimum wage law.

The COA said Ivy Tech is not an employer for purposes of the minimum wage law because it is subject to FLSA requirements. The Minimum Wage Law states that it only applies to employers not covered by the FLSA, and Ivy Tech is. Skillman counters that he should be able to recover overtime pay through the Minimum Wage Law anyway because there is no threat of double recovery through the FLSA. However, the COA said Ivy Tech is still an employer under the FLSA and subject to its rulings.

Skillman said finding Ivy Tech is subject to FLSA standards renders meaningless inclusion of the state as a covered employer under the Minimum Wage Law, but the court did not agree. It said if that were the case, the Minimum Wage Law could be rendered meaningless in most cases. Also, there are exceptions to the rule, but Skillman did not claim any of those.

The case is Edward Skillman v Ivy Tech Community College, 49A04-1509-PL-1279.


Please enable JavaScript to view this content.

{{ articles_remaining }}
Free {{ article_text }} Remaining
{{ articles_remaining }}
Free {{ article_text }} Remaining Article limit resets on
{{ count_down }}