Appellate Court Addresses Irregular Schedules: What Jones v. PSC Means for Oilfield Workers’ Pay and OT

In Jones v. Producers Service Corporation, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit addressed a dispute over unpaid overtime wages under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The plaintiffs, oilfield technicians employed by Producers Service Corporation (PSC), filed a class action lawsuit, claiming that PSC violated the FLSA and Ohio state wage laws. Specifically, they argued that PSC failed to pay the required overtime compensation for hours worked beyond 40 hours per week.

PSC defended its pay structure by claiming compliance with a “Belo plan”—a statutorily authorized exception under the FLSA, which allows employers to pay a fixed salary for fluctuating work hours. However, the key issue in this case was whether the technicians’ work schedules fluctuated due to job necessity, which is a requirement under the Belo plan.

The district court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, granting them summary judgment on the grounds that PSC could not prove that the technicians’ irregular hours were a result of their job duties. Instead, the court found that PSC’s scheduling practices were pre-determined by management, not due to the inherent unpredictability of the job itself. As a result, PSC’s Belo plan was deemed invalid, and a settlement of $400,000 was reached, covering damages, costs, and fees, but PSC was allowed to appeal the district court’s summary judgment orders, which it did.

On appeal, the Sixth Circuit reviewed the case and upheld the district court’s decision. The appellate court emphasized that for a Belo plan to be valid, job duties must truly necessitate irregular hours, not schedules manipulated by the employer. In this case, the court found insufficient evidence to support PSC’s argument that the work itself caused unpredictable hours, and affirmed that the fixed scheduling practices undercut PSC’s claim.

This case highlights the strict criteria required for employers to use a Belo plan under the FLSA, particularly the need for irregular hours to stem from the nature of the job itself, rather than employer-imposed schedules.

In light of Jones v. Producers Service Corp., there are several practical takeaways for oilfield workers. First, it’s important to understand that even if your employer offers a guaranteed weekly wage through a Belo plan, it doesn’t mean they can avoid paying overtime if the worker’s hours aren’t truly irregular by necessity. Workers should keep track of their schedules and understand the reasons behind their irregular hours, as a company cannot claim fluctuating hours to avoid paying proper wages if those hours are controlled or pre-determined by management. If the worker’s schedule appears to be based more on company policy than the unpredictable nature of the work, the worker may have grounds to challenge your compensation. Lastly, it is important for a worker to know his or her rights under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and state labor laws is crucial, as this case highlights the importance of proper classification and wage calculation in industries with irregular work schedules like the oil and gas sector.

About Attorney Josh Borsellino: Josh is a Texas-licensed attorney that has represented hundreds of oilfield workers on claims for unpaid overtime. He has filed overtime pay lawsuits across the state of Texas, as well as in federal courts in New Mexico, Oklahoma, Kansas, and others.  For a free, confidential, no-obligation consultation of your potential overtime case, call Josh at 817.908.9861, email him here, or use this contact form.  

Share This Post

Archives