On May 28, 2026, the U.S. Department of Labor Wage and Hour Division (DOL) released an opinion letter confirming an important point for employers: an employee who qualifies for the executive, administrative, or professional exemption under Section 13(a)(1) of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) does not automatically lose that exemption merely because they perform some secondary non-exempt work for which they are paid on an hourly basis. See FLSA2026-5.
For employers that use dual-role staffing models, especially in healthcare and other operational settings where managers or professionals sometimes step into front-line duties, the opinion letter offers useful guidance, but also underscores the need for careful classification review under federal law and any stricter state-law standards.
What the Opinion Letter Says
The core takeaway is straightforward. An exempt employee may perform some non-exempt duties for which they are paid on an hourly basis and still remain exempt if the employee’s primary duties are exempt work and the employee is paid for that work on a salary basis in an amount at least equal to the required salary threshold.
Importantly, the opinion letter does not suggest that employers may freely assign unlimited non-exempt work to exempt employees, or that employers may compensate exempt employees for their exempt work on an hourly basis.
Why Dual-Role Arrangements Need Careful Review
Employers should not treat this opinion letter as a blanket safe harbor. An employee’s exempt status still depends on the facts. If an employee’s day-to-day role shifts so far toward non-exempt work that exempt functions are no longer the primary duty, the exemption will fail.
Healthcare employers are likely among the most affected. For example, a nurse manager who supervises staff, manages scheduling, and makes operational decisions may still qualify as exempt even if the manager sometimes provides hands-on patient care during a staffing gap. Other industries face similar issues. A retail manager who helps stock shelves during a rush, or a hospitality manager who assists at the front desk during a busy check-in period, does not necessarily lose their exempt status if management remains the employee’s primary duty.
The Salary-Basis Requirement Still Matters
Compliance with the salary-basis rules is also crucial. Exempt job duties alone are not enough for employers to claim the 13(a)(1) exemptions.
Under federal law, the salary-basis requirement is met if the employee regularly receives a predetermined amount that is not subject to reduction because of quality or quantity of work. Also, the amount of the salary must meet certain monetary thresholds. For executive, administrative, and professional exemptions, the regulations require payment on a salary basis of at least $684 per week.
Employers should, therefore, review not only job duties, but also payroll practices.
What Employers Should Do Now
Employers using dual-role arrangements should take several steps:
- Review exempt job descriptions and compare them to actual duties performed.
- Confirm that your exempt employees’ primary job duties qualify as exempt work.
- Audit salary-basis compliance, including for improper deductions.
- Train managers not to assume that a job title alone determines exempt status.
- Evaluate state-law requirements separately, because some states impose stricter tests and higher salary thresholds than federal law.
That final point is critical. The opinion letter addresses federal law. It does not override state wage-and-hour laws, which may apply different standards, higher monetary thresholds, or be less forgiving of mixed-duty roles.