Christopher v. SmithKline Beecham Corp.
Issues
Should a court provide deference to the Secretary’s interpretation of the FLSA and hold that pharmaceutical sales representatives are outside salesmen, thereby exempt from the required time-and-a-half overtime wages?
The Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (“FLSA”) requires employers to pay employees one-and-a-half times their normal wages for any time worked over forty hours in a given week, but exempts “outside salesmen” from this overtime pay requirement. Respondent GlaxoSmithKline (“GSK”) refused to pay overtime to petitioners Michael Christopher and Frank Buchanan, whom it employed as pharmaceutical sales representatives, because it considered them to be “outside salesmen.” Christopher and Buchanan sued, arguing that they were not “outside salesmen” under the Secretary of Labor’s interpretation. The Supreme Court will determine whether that interpretation is entitled to deference and whether Christopher and Buchanan are subject to the FLSA’s outside salesman exemption.
Questions as Framed for the Court by the Parties
The questions presented are: (1) Whether deference is owed to the Secretary of Labor’s interpretation of the FLSA’s outside sales exemption and related regulations; and (2) Whether that exemption applies to pharmaceutical sales representatives.
Congress enacted the FLSA in response to inequitable depression-era working conditions. See 29 U.S.C.
Written by
The authors would like to thank former Supreme Court Reporter of Decisions Frank Wagner for his assistance in editing this preview.
Additional Resources
• U.S.S.C.: Court Grants Certiorari to PSRs on Appeal of 9th Circuit Decision Holding Pharma Reps Exempt Under the FLSA’s Outside Sales Exemption, Overtime Law Blog, Nov. 29, 2011.
• Christopher v. SmithKline Beecham: SCOTUS Grants Review in Pharmaceutical Sales Rep Action, California Employment Law Blog, Dec. 15, 2011.