As the Department of Labor (DOL) mentioned in a recent opinion letter, part-time workers have to pass the same salary test for exemption as full-time employees. That means they have to make at least $455 a week, no matter how much they work. There’s no provision in the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) to let companies prorate that amount to fit a work week that’s less than 40 hours.

Take this scenario the DOL describes: An employee works full-time making $30,000 a year. Then, that employee starts working just 20 hours a week, and gets paid $15,000 (or, roughly $288/week). That puts him or her below $455 a week, so the employee is no longer exempt. (Of course, if the new part-time salary was still high enough, he or she would stay exempt.)

Note: The opinion letter also points out that employers are allowed to pay part-timers on a salary basis, as long as they make sure the weekly salary divided by the actual number of hours worked comes out to at least the minimum wage.

Read the letter here.

The facts:

An employee used up her 12 weeks of FMLA leave. When she got back, she still couldn’t work full time, so she asked to be put on a part-time schedule. The company said no, she could only get her full-time job back. She sued, claiming she was owed a new schedule as an “accommodation” under FMLA.

The employer said:

FMLA doesn’t say anything about accommodating employees. The Americans with Disabilities Act does, but the woman’s condition didn’t meet the ADA’s definition of a disability. Therefore, there was no obligation to let her work part time.

Who won the case?

Answer: The employer.

Why: The court agreed that once the woman used her 12 weeks of leave, the company didn’t have to accommodate her illness.

In some cases, employees might have conditions that make them eligible for FMLA leave and qualify as protected disabilities. But courts have agreed that meeting the definition under one law doesn’t automatically mean an employee’s protected by the other.

Cite: Baker v. Hunter Douglas Inc.