In the case of Carol King v. West Virginia’s Choice, Carol King filed a lawsuit against her former employer, West Virginia’s Choice (WV Choice), for not providing her with overtime compensation. WV Choice employed in-home direct caregivers, such as Ms. King, to provide in-home service to individuals who are unable to take care of themselves due to age or infirmity.
Ms. King stated that she, and other similarly situated employees, were not provided with overtime compensation for hours worked more than 40 per week. WV Choice filed for a summary judgment (judgment against one party without a full trial), stating that it did not meet the definition of “employer’ under West Virginia’s Minimum Wage and Maximum Hours Standards (MWMHS).
The circuit court ruled in favor of WV Choice, granting summary judgment and stating that the MWMHS only applied to individuals who qualify as “employees” and “employers” under its specific definition. The court found that WV Choice did not meet the criteria to be classified as an “employer” according to the MWMHS.
The court decided that WV Choice qualified as an enterprise engaged in commerce based on evidence that showed their employment over direct care workers who handled goods or materials that have been produced for commerce. Some of WV Choice’s employees also resided in other states which means WV Choice conducts financial transactions across state lines.
Due to that, it had been decided that Ms. King was not entitled to overtime compensation, and her case was dismissed.
Key lessons from this case:
- This case emphasizes the importance of understanding the statutory definitions of “employer” under the MWMHS to identify its applicability to a company.
- It is important to know the distinction between state and federal laws.
- It is important to know an employee’s wage entitlement and company policies to avoid confusion.
If you want to know more about overtime regulations, read our guide on West Virginia Overtime Laws.
