Olms interpretative Manual

SUPERVISORSANDEMPLOYEES

266.001LMRDA,SECTION203(e)

Nothing contained in this section shall be construed to require any regular officer,supervisor, or employee of an employer to file a report in connection with services rendered tosuch employer, nor shall any employer be required to file a report covering expenditures made toany regular officer, supervisor, or employee of an employer as compensation for service as aregularofficer, supervisor,oremployeeof suchemployer.

266.002See29CFR 406.5

266.005 INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS

Under section 203(e), a regular officer of an employer and the employer are exemptedfrom filing a report on services rendered by the officer and payments made to the officer and intheregularcourse ofbusiness.The exemptiondoesnotapplytoindependentcontractors.

Whether or not a person is acting as an officer in the regular course of business or anindependent contractor is a question of fact and the title assigned to the person performing dutiesonbehalf ofan employeris notcontrolling.Additionalpay forthedutieswouldbestrong
evidence that such activities are not part of the regular duties of the officer, but it would notnecessarilybeconclusive.

266.010ATTORNEYASINDEPENDENTCONTRACTOR

Whether or not an attorney who is engaged in activities which would require him to reportunder section 203(b) is exempt from these requirements under section 203(e), by virtue of beinga regular employee, would depend on the facts of the relationship in each case.Normally,however, an attorney, who is not employed on a full-time basis by the employer, would beconsideredto be an “independentcontractor”ratherthan“employee.”

266.100NONEXEMPTPAYMENTS

The exemption in section 203(e) applies only to expenditures made for services which areperformed by employees in the regular and ordinary course of their employment.Such maybethecase,dependingontheparticularcircumstances,forpaymentsfallingundersection203(a)(2). For example, where an employer prepares a message to his employees which attemptsto persuade employees as to the manner of exercising their right to organize, and the employerthen has the message conveyed to all plant employees individually through his labor relationsdirector who is a regular staff member, no report would be due under section 203(a)(2) becausethedirector would beperforming as aregularemployee within themeaning of section203(e).

However, if the employer called in one of his old and trusted employees who was a drill pressoperator, for example, and asked him (without disclosing the assignment to other employees) topersuade his fellow employees as to their right to organize, then a report would be due from theemployerunder 203(a)(2).