Overtime case goes from the service desk to high court

NoneEncino Motorcars LLC v. Navarro et al.The Supreme Court will hear arguments Wednesday, April 20, in a case involving overtime pay for dealership service advisers. Here's how it made its way to Washington. September 2012: Hector Navarro, Mike Shirinian, Anthony Pinkins, Kevin Malone and Reuben Castro sue Encino Motorcars LLC, which does business as Mercedes-Benz of Encino. Their complaint alleges that Mercedes-Benz of Encino violated the Fair Labor Standards Act by failing to pay them overtime. January 2013: U.S. District Court for the Central District of California dismisses the suit, siding with earlier rulings by the 4th and 5th U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeals that service advisers are covered by an exemption that applies to “any salesman, partsman, or mechanic primarily engaged in selling or servicing automobiles” at dealerships. February 2013: The service advisers appeal to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. March 2015: The 9th Circuit reverses the district court ruling, breaking with other appellate courts. September 2015: Encino Motorcars petitions the Supreme Court to review the 9th Circuit's decision. October 2015: The Supreme Court places Encino Motorcars LLC v. Navarro et al. on its docket. Steven SzakalyChief economist, NADA“You're just creating a lot of uncertainty in the industry and eliminating what was an excellent alignment of the economic interests of the consumers, the employers and the employees.” WASHINGTON -- A shorthanded U.S. Supreme Court this week will take up the case of five dealership service advisers who sought overtime pay for their 55-hour workweeks, a dispute that could have big implications for dealerships and their compensation structures.

Overtime case goes from the service desk to high court

Featured Stories