A Consumer Protection and Employment Law Firm Serving California, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Illinois.

Injunction delays, but likely will not stop overtime rules

Table Of Contents
Summarize with
ChatGPT Claude Gemini Perplexity Grok
New salary threshold rules were scheduled to go into effect on December 1. Many human resource departments have already complied. What happens if yours has not? The bad news is that you may have to wait a little longer. If your salary is below $47,476 ($913/week) and you work 45-50 hours weeks routinely, you could be affected by the rule changes. The delay is due to a court case filed by a number of states challenging the constitutionality of the executive action. To explain more details about the change in rules, we wrote a paper over the summer titled “Overtime: Are You Eligible Under Expanded Federal Regulations?” The court injunction was issued just weeks before the rules were to take effect. In the months since the rules were announced in May, most employers have complied. It seems unlikely that many will roll back salary increases or reductions in hours. The main issue relates to employers who waited and did nothing. Our white paper is a starting point and answers many basic questions. In addition, your employer cannot retaliate against you for raising the issue or asking questions. As the rules remain in flux, out attorneys can provide more guidance based on your individual circumstances. When you have concerns about a negative employment action or worry that you are not being compensated for all your work, schedule an appointment to speak with one of our experienced employment attorneys.

Quick Navigation

Free Consultation

Undisclosed
Settlement

TCPA class action against the Los Angeles Times. Final approval granted 2014.

More Details
$750,000
Settlement

Common fund class-wide TCPA settlement against home healthcare provider. Final approval granted.

More Details
$27.6M
Settlement

TCPA class action certified on behalf of approximately 2,000,000 class members under Rule 23(b)(2) and (b)(3). Subsequently settled on a Rule 23(b)(2) and (b)(3) basis. Final approval granted.

More Details
$5.2M
Settlement

/

Unruh Act class action on behalf of approximately 240,000 consumers challenging Tinder’s age-based differential pricing for its subscription service. Final approval granted; subsequently went up on appeal.

More Details
$390,000
Settlement

TCPA class action alleging HD Supply sent unauthorized marketing text messages to consumers’ mobile phones without consent between October 21, 2011 and July 26, 2017. Presided over by Judge Fernando M. Olguin. Case terminated January 29, 2018.

More Details
$1,500,000
Settlement

/

TCPA class action against a Kansas-based payday lender alleged to have contacted consumers via prerecorded calls on their cell phones to collect alleged debts without consent. California federal judge granted final approval.

More Details
$6,500,000
Settlement

/

Cal. Penal Code § 632.7 class action certified by contested motion under Rule 23(b)(2) and (b)(3) on behalf of over 40,000 class members whose calls were recorded without their knowledge or consent. Final approval granted.

More Details
$13,000,000
Settlement

/

$13 Million Class action alleging HSBC recorded consumer telephone calls without knowledge or consent in violation of California’s Privacy Statute (Penal Code § 632.7). California Federal Judge granted final approval.

More Details
$34,000,000
Settlement

/

One of the largest TCPA class action settlements in U.S. history at time of approval. Alleged Chase used an automatic telephone dialing system to contact consumers on their cell phones without prior express consent from July 2008 through December 2013. Settlement class included over 32 million members. Final approval granted March 2016.

More Details
$150,000,000
Settlement

/

Class action on behalf of over 100,000 owners of GM vehicles equipped with allegedly defective LG-manufactured batteries posing fire and safety risks. Litigation commenced December 2020. U.S. District Judge Terrence G. Berg indicated preliminary approval of the $150 million settlement.

More Details
$100,000,000
Settlement

/ /

Landmark gig-economy class action. DoorDash drivers in California and Massachusetts alleged they were wrongly classified as independent contractors rather than employees. Firm served as class counsel. Final approval granted January 13, 2022 — the largest gig-economy worker class settlement in U.S. history at the time.

More Details

Office Locations

Copyright 2025 Law Offices of Todd M. Friedman, P.C. All Rights Reserved.