To qualify the professional exemption to the FLSA’s overtime requirements, an employee must meet the salary basis and two primary duty requirements for the exemption. Decisions make clear that an employee make clear that an employee need only negate one of the three primary duty requirements to defeat the professional exemption. Ader v. SimonMed Imaging Inc., 465 F. Supp. 3d 953, 961 (D. Ariz. 2020); Kress v. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, 2013 WL 140102, at *5 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 10, 2013).
To be paid on a salary basis, an employee must consistently earn the same amount each pay period regardless of quantity or quality of work. As of July 1, 2024, the minimum salary that an exempt professional employee must receive is $844 per week or $43,888 per year. As of January 1, 2025, the salary threshold is set to increase to $1,128 per week or $58,656 per year. Additional about the salary basis test and thresholds can be found here on the DOL’s website.
The FLSA requires the use of a three-part conjunctive primary duty test to analyze whether workers are employed as exempt professionals. The primary duty test requires an exempt professional’s primary duty to be (1) work requiring advanced knowledge; (2) the advanced knowledge must be in a field of science or learning; and (3) the advanced knowledge must be customarily acquired by a prolonged course of specialized intellectual instruction. 29 U.S.C.§ 29 U.S.C. 213(a)(1).
To meet the FLSA professional exemption, the employee’s primary duty must be “work requiring advanced knowledge.” The regulations explain that such work is “predominantly intellectual in character, and which includes work requiring the consistent exercise of discretion and judgment, as distinguished from performance of routine mental, manual, mechanical or physical work. An employee who performs work requiring advanced knowledge generally uses the advanced knowledge to analyze, interpret or make deductions from varying facts or circumstances. Advanced knowledge cannot be attained at the high school level.” 29 C.F.R. § 541.301(b).
To meet the FLSA professional exemption, an exempt professional’s primary duty must not only involve “work requiring advanced knowledge,” but that advanced knowledge must be from a “field of science or learning.” The regulations explain that “field of science or learning” includes “the traditional professions of law, medicine, theology, accounting, actuarial computation, engineering, architecture, teaching, various types of physical, chemical and biological sciences, pharmacy and other similar occupations that have a recognized professional status.” 29 C.F.R. § 301(c). The regulation distinguishes these fields of science and learning from “the mechanical arts or skilled trades where in some instances the knowledge is of a fairly advanced type, but is not in a field of science or learning.” 29 C.F.R. § 541.301(c).
“Advanced Knowledge” From a “Prolonged Course of Specialized Instruction”
To qualify for the professional exemption, an exempt professional’s primary duty must not only involve “work requiring advanced knowledge” that knowledge must also be “customarily acquired by a prolonged course of specialized intellectual instruction.” The regulations explain that this phrase “restricts the exemption to professions where specialized academic training is a standard prerequisite for entrance into the profession.” 29 C.F.R. § 541.301(d).
The regulation further explains that the exemption is unavailable for “occupations that customarily may be performed with only the general knowledge acquired by an academic degree in any field, with knowledge acquired through an apprenticeship, or with training in the performance of routine mental, manual, mechanical or physical processes. The … exemption also does not apply to occupations in which most employees have acquired their skill be experience rather than by advanced knowledge.” 29 C.F.R. § 541.301(d).
29 C.F.R. § 541.301(f) explains that the areas in “which the professional exemption may be available are expanding. As knowledge is developed, academic training is broadened and specialized degrees are offered in new and diverse fields, thus creating new specialists in particular fields of science or learning. When an advanced specialized degree has become a standard requirement for a particular occupation, that occupation may have acquired the characteristics of a learned profession.” Accordingly, the professional exemption will continue to expand to include more occupations where an advanced degree is a prerequisite for the occupation in the future.
Professional Employee Examples
The professional exemption includes regulations that provide categories of workers who meet and do not meet the requirement of the professional exemption. 29 C.F.R. § 541.301(e)(1)-(7). The regulation provides important distinctions between exempt and non-exempt employees who are employed within the same occupations, including nurses, accountants, and chefs.
First, the regulation explains that “registered nurses who are registered by the appropriate State examining board generally meet the duties requirements for the learned professional exemption.” The regulation, however, explains that “licensed practical nurses and other similar health care employees” do not qualify because “possession of a specialized academic degree is not a standard prerequisite for entry into such occupations.” 29 C.F.R. 203(e)(2).
Second, the regulation explains that “certified public accountants generally meet the duties requirement of the professional exemption,” but that “accounting clerks, bookkeepers, and other employees who perform a great deal of routine work generally will not qualify as exempt professionals.”
Third, the regulation explains that “executive chefs and sous chefs, who have attained a four-year degree in a specialized academic degree in a culinary arts program, generally meet the duties requirements of the learned professional exemption.” The regulation distinguishes these chefs from cooks who perform “predominant perform predominantly routine mental, manual, mechanical or physical work.”
Our unpaid overtime attorneys based in Dallas, Texas have national unpaid overtime litigation experience in federal courts throughout the United States. Mr. Siegel has personally represented clients in wage and hour suits in at least 20 states, including Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Illinois, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia.
