Fill and Sign the Board Rules New Mexico State Personnel Office Form

1.7.1 Fair Labor Standards Act 29 USC § 201 et seq. This case arises under the Fair Labor Standards Act, the federal law that provides for the payment of [minimum wages] [time-and-a-half overtime pay]. The Plaintiff claims that the Defendant did not pay the Plaintiff the [minimum wage] [overtime pay] required by law. In order to prevail on this claim, the Plaintiff must prove each of the following facts by a preponderance of the evidence:First: That the Plaintiff was employed by the Defendant during the time period involved;Second: That the Plaintiff was [engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce] [employed by an enterprise engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce]; andThird: That the Defendant failed to pay the Plaintiff the [minimum wage][overtime pay] required by law.[In the verdict form that I will explain in a moment, you will beasked to answer a series of questions concerning each of these factualissues.] [The parties have stipulated or agreed to the first fact - - that thePlaintiff was employed by the Defendant - - and you should considerit as established.]With respect to the second fact - - that the Plaintiff was employed by an enterprise engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce - - the term “commerce” has a very broad meaning and includes any trade, transportation, transmission or communication between any place within a state and any place outside that state. The Plaintiff was engaged in the “production of goods” if the Pl aintiff was employed in producing, manufacturing, mining, handling or transporting goods, or in any other manner worked on such goods or worked in any closely related process or occupation directly essential to the production of goods. [Finally, an enterprise engaged in commerce or the production of goods for commerce means an enterprise that has employees engaged in commerce or production of goods for commerce and has annual gross sales of at least $500,000.]The minimum wage that the Act required to be paid during theperiod of time involved in this case was $ per hour. [In determining whether an employer has paid the minimum wage it is entitled to a credit for the reasonable costs of furnishing certain non- cash items [unless excluded under the terms of a union contract applicable to the Plaintiff], such as meals and lodging if furnished for the benefit of the employee and voluntarily accepted by the employee.] [In addition to the minimum wage, the Act requires an employer to pay its employees at a rate of at least one and one-half times their regular rate for time worked in any one work week over 40 hours. This is commonly known as time-and-a-half pay for "overtime" work.] [The employee's "regular rate" during a particular week is the basis for calculating any overtime pay due to the employee for that week. The "regular rate" for a week is determined by dividing the first 40 hours worked into the total wages paid for those 40 hours. The overtime rate, then, would be one and one-half of that rate and would be owing for each hour in excess of 40 hours worked during the work week.]The Defendant claims that even if you should find that the Plaintiffhas proved all the necessary facts that must be proved to establish this claim, the [minimum wage] [overtime pay] law does not apply because of an exemption from these requirements.The particular exemption claimed by the Defendant is [insertapplicable exemption].In order to receive the benefit of this exemption, the Defendant has the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence [list or describe essential elements of the claimed exemption]. If upon consideration of all the evidence you find that the Plaintiff has failed to prove the Plaintiff's claim, your verdict should be for the Defendant.Or, if the Defendant has satisfied you by a preponderance of the evidence that it is exempt from the [minimum wage] [overtime pay] law, then your verdict should be for the Defendant.If, however, you find that the Plaintiff has proved the claim, and that the Defendant has failed to establish an exemption, then you must turn to the question of damages which the Plaintiff is entitled to recover. The measure of damages is the difference between what the Plaintiff should have been paid under the Act and the amount that you find the Plaintiff actually was paid. 1.7.1Fair Labor Standards Act29 USC § 216SPECIAL INTERROGATORIESTO THE JURYDo you find from a preponderance of the evidence:1. That the Plaintiff was [engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce] [employed by an enterprise engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce]?Answer Yes or No2. That the Defendant failed to pay the Plaintiff the [mi nimum wage] [overtime pay required by law]?Answer Yes or No[Note: If you answered No to either of the preceding questions you need not answer either of the remaining questions.]3. That the Plaintiff was exempt from the Fair Labor Standards Act as an [describe pertinent exemption, i.e., “administrative,” “executive”] employee?Answer Yes or No [Note: If you answered Yes to the preceding question you need not answer the remaining question.]4. That the Plaintiff should be awarded $ as the Plaintiff’s damages.SO SAY WE ALL.ForepersonDATED:ANNOTATIONS AND COMMENTSThe Fair Labor Standards Act is found at 29 USC § 201 et seq. The elements of the exemptions usually claimed - - executive, professional and administrative - - may be found at 29 C.F.R. § 541.1 et seq.