•  
  •  
 

Abstract

In 2023, the Fourth Circuit in Carrera v. E.M.D. Sales split from its sister courts by requiring employers to prove by clear and convincing evidence that an employee is exempt from the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”). The Supreme Court reversed the Fourth Circuit’s decision, resolving the split by holding that the preponderance of the evidence is the correct standard. This Note argues that the Fourth Circuit, despite failing to provide a justification for its heightened standard, was correct because it preserves the terms and spirit of the FLSA. Congress enacted the FLSA as a remedial statute aimed to alleviate the power imbalance inherent in the employer-employee relationship. Courts accordingly interpreted the FLSA liberally under the narrow construction canon to ensure that as many employees as possible are protected under the Act. Imposing the clear and convincing evidence standard would serve to continue courts' practice of construing the FLSA in favor of the employee. Especially in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Encino Motorcars v. Navarro where it rejected the narrow construction canon, the clear and convincing evidence standard would help to preserve the FLSA’s express purpose. The Supreme Court, however, continues in its deregulatory trend by ruling that preponderance of the evidence is the correct standard.

Download

Share

COinS