Moreau v. Klevenhagen

In 1985 Congress amended the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) to allow public-sector employers to compensate employees for working overtime with additional time off instead of overtime pay. The amendment allowed public agencies to do this pursuant to: (i) applicable provisions of a collective-bargaining agreement, memorandum of understanding, or any other agreement between the public agency and the employees’ representatives; or (ii) in the case of employees not covered by (i), an agreement or understanding arrived at between the employer and employee before the performance of the work. Lynwood Moreau (plaintiff), president of a sheriff’s union, had represented deputy sheriffs in various matters, but Moreau was barred by state law from entering into a collective-bargaining agreement with the county. Consequently, the county entered into individual form agreements with deputy sheriffs spelling out the terms and conditions of employment. These agreements provided for 1.5 hours of additional time off instead of overtime pay. Moreau, representing approximately 400 county sheriffs, filed an action in federal district court alleging the agreements violated the FLSA. Moreau claimed that the sheriffs were covered by subclause (i), and because no agreement was signed with the official representative of the sheriffs, the county could not rely on subclause (ii), rendering the overtime agreements invalid. Thus, the county would have to pay regular overtime per the FLSA. The district court ruled against Moreau. The court of appeals affirmed, albeit reaching slightly different statutory interpretations. Noting a conflict among the circuits, the Supreme Court granted certiorari. At issue was the statutory meaning of the FLSA amendment.