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

New overtime rules: Our white paper explains the details

Table Of Contents
Summarize with
ChatGPT Claude Gemini Perplexity Grok

Salaried workers traditionally have not qualified for overtime. But as pay has lagged for employees classified exempt or salaried and hours only increase, new federal rules will provide welcome relief.

While the rules do not go into effect until December, you need to learn if and how they might affect you. In order to provide more details, we recently put together a white paper.

Employment issues also go beyond pay. Asking questions can ruffle feathers and lead to subsequent retaliation. In addition, if your position is reclassified from exempt to non-exempt, you may be entitled to meal and rest breaks. When employers retaliate or fail to offer appropriate breaks, legal remedies do exist.

If you have earn a salary of less than $47,476 and work more than 40 hours most weeks, read “Overtime: Are You Eligible Under Expanded Federal Regulations?” now. You will learn:

  • The basic rules for determining exempt/non-exempt status
  • How bonuses or commissions affect the new salary floor in California
  • When to have a discussion with your employer

Employers have several options to comply with the new rules in the next few months. We explain what they are and provide several practical examples. When you have concerns about the actions of your employer, get more information by speaking with one of our experience employment law 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.