Wage and Hour Spotlight: Dennis M. Brown, Littler Mendelson

•February 9, 2026

Littler – Insights/News•Feb 9, 2026

Why It Matters

The insights signal rising compliance risk for employers and a shift toward more aggressive wage‑and‑hour enforcement, impacting cost structures across industries.

Key Takeaways

•Federal wage‑hour probes are accelerating nationally
•Multi‑state compliance challenges intensify for large employers
•Overtime misclassification remains top litigation driver
•Robust record‑keeping essential to defend claims

Pulse Analysis

The wage‑and‑hour arena is entering a period of intensified regulatory focus, driven by the Department of Labor’s renewed commitment to enforce the Fair Labor Standards Act. Recent data shows a 30 percent rise in investigations targeting overtime misclassification, especially in technology and retail sectors. Companies that rely on exempt classifications without rigorous job‑analysis are now vulnerable to costly back‑pay awards and penalties. Understanding the nuances of the "salary‑basis" test and the duties test is essential for legal teams aiming to shield their clients from exposure.

Beyond federal scrutiny, state-level initiatives are reshaping the compliance landscape. States such as California and New York have introduced stricter overtime thresholds and expanded definitions of employee status. Multi‑jurisdictional firms must navigate a patchwork of rules that differ in overtime eligibility, meal‑break requirements, and record‑keeping mandates. Implementing a centralized compliance framework, supported by technology that tracks hours across locations, can reduce the risk of contradictory practices and streamline audit readiness.

For employers, the strategic response involves more than reactive defenses. Proactive measures include conducting comprehensive job‑description audits, updating payroll systems to capture accurate work‑hour data, and training managers on lawful scheduling practices. Engaging experienced wage‑and‑hour counsel early can identify hidden liabilities and guide policy revisions before regulators intervene. As litigation trends suggest, firms that adopt a forward‑looking compliance posture are better positioned to avoid disruptive lawsuits and preserve operational efficiency.