On December 14, 2015, in <em>Rosenfield v. GlobalTranz Enterprises, Inc.</em>, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that the proper test for when an employee’s actions constituted a protected complaint under the anti-retaliation provision of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (“FLSA”) was whether the employer had fair notice that the actions were a complaint. In holding that the employee’s managerial status did not change the analytical framework, the Ninth Circuit diverged from previous rulings in the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the First, Fifth, Sixth, and Tenth Circuits that required managerial employees to assert adverse action against their employers to receive anti-retaliation protection. This Comment argues that the Ninth Circuit’s use of a single test for both managerial and non-managerial employees is correct in that it allows for more robust enforcement of the FLSA, and is thus in keeping with Congress’ objective in passing the FLSA.

BCLR Electronic Supplement

Boston College Law Review

<em>Rosenfield v. GlobalTranz</em>: Is the Manager Rule Dead? The Ninth Circuit Holds That Fair Notice Is the Appropriate Test for Whether a Managerial Employee's Activity Is Protected Under the FLSA

Search LIRA@BC Law

Search

Resource type (1)

Creator (1)

Keyword (0)

Collection (2)

Availability (1)

Subject (3)

Results

Rosenfield v. GlobalTranz: Is the Manager Rule Dead? The Ninth Circuit Holds That Fair Notice Is the Appropriate Test for Whether a Managerial Employee's Activity Is Protected Under the FLSA