Global Compliance Desk – Taiwan

Voluntary Overtime Work

The Supreme Administrative Court recently made several important judgments regarding whether employers are obligated to provide employees with overtime pay for employees’ “voluntary overtime work”; this issue was also discussed at the 2018 Law Conference of the High Administrative Court, although their opinion was different from that of the Supreme Administrative Court.

Hence, judgments made by the Supreme Administrative Court have a binding effect on lower courts, it will be advisable to follow them and any other judgment or view by court or law conference shall be for reference only.

“Voluntary overtime work” and “Overtime pay” summary as per the latest judgment of the Supreme Administrative Court:

  • Employees’ attendance records are the basis for employers to verify whether employees have been working at the workplace designated by employers during normal working hours or for any overtime hours.
  • If an employee’s attendance records show that he remained in the office after normal working hours, and the employer did not make any objections or prevent him from staying in the office, the employee could be presumed as having worked overtime and the employer will be obligated to provide the employee with overtime pay in accordance with the Labor Standards Act.
  • If an employee’s attendance records show that he remained in the office after normal working hours, but the employer could prove that the employee did not perform services for the employer after the normal working hours, the employer will not be obligated to provide the employee with overtime pay in accordance with the Labor Standards Act.
  • If the employers prove that the employee didn’t perform any services required by the employer beyond normal working hours, instead, an employee was carrying out some personal work, such statement issued by the employee would suffice not to pay him overtime pay (see Supreme Administrative Court Judgment 106-Pan-715 (2017). However, if such statement was made in a standard format prepared by the employer and statements issued by different employees have the same wording and content, then even if such statements have been submitted by the employees, the Supreme Administrative Court opined that further investigations would need to be conducted to verify whether the employees did perform services for the employer after the normal working hours (e.g. checking the employee’s email correspondences) before the employer may be relieved from its obligation of providing overtime pay (see Supreme Administrative Court Judgment 107-Pan-508).

 

 

 

 

Edited by: Shreya Bhattacharya

Sajid Mir
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Sajid Mir
A labor and employment lawyer at Replicon who specializes in global compliance. Replicon provides award-winning products that make it easy to manage your workforce. Replicon is an industry leader in global compliance and has a dedicated team which pro-actively monitors international labor regulations for ensuring proper adherence with specific country rule requirements.
Get started today.
Set up a free trial based on your business needs. Start Free Trial

How the Overtime Rule Affects Employee Benefit Plans

Some employers use benefit tiers for exempt and nonexempt staff By Stephen Miller, CEBS SHRM | October 08, 2019 Employers complying with the Department of Labor's final rule raising the…Read More

Make Time and Attendance Part Of Your Digital Transformation

TLNT | October 10, 2019 By Raj Narayanaswamy, Co-founder and co-CEO at Replicon Many businesses embarking on a payroll and HR transformation journey can easily get caught up in the…Read More

Global Compliance Desk – Australia

Recent Federal Court Decision: Accrual of Personal/Carer’s Leave Most employers in Australia follow the practice of calculating personal/carer's leave entitlements in hours. On 21 August 2019, the Federal Court of…Read More

Miscalculating wages by a few cents led to this company paying a six-figure lawsuit

West Marine Products, which operates a chain of retail stores across the United States specializing in boating supply and fishing equipment, recently settled a class action lawsuit involving 707 former…Read More

Employee time tracking is dead

iBeacons, Bluetooth Low Energy, Proximity sensing and the obsolescence of time tracking as we know it. Businesses have to track the time their employees work for a variety of reasons,…Read More

How Sarbanes-Oxley Impacts HR Departments

Ever since the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) was passed in 2002, following a spate of high-profile corporate scandals, companies have had to take a wide range of precautions to ensure that…Read More
  • Cloud
  • In The News
  • Corporate
  • Professional Services Management
  • Project and Program Management
  • Shared Services Management
  • Time and Attendance Management
  • Workforce Management
  • Customer Feature
  • Feature Update
  • Time Intelligence
  • Industry News
  • Webinar Recap
  • Global Compliance Updates
  • Chat with us
    How can we help you?