As hybrid work models become a permanent fixture in the modern economy, the lines between personal time and professional duty continue to blur. One of the most persistent questions for HR professionals has been the compensability of travel time when an employee works from home in the morning and transitions to the office in the afternoon—or vice versa. To address this, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) Wage and Hour Division recently issued Opinion Letter FLSA2023-1, providing much-needed clarity on how the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) applies to mid-day remote travel.
The Context: A Shift in the “Continuous Workday”
Historically, the “continuous workday” rule has been a cornerstone of FLSA compliance. This doctrine generally suggests that once an employee begins their first “principal activity” of the day, all time spent until they finish their last principal activity is considered compensable work time, including travel between different job sites. However, as noted by legal analysts at Littler Mendelson and the National Law Review, the rise of remote and hybrid work has forced a re-evaluation of how this rule applies when the “job site” transitions from a home office to a corporate headquarters.
In the scenario presented to the DOL, an employee chooses to work a portion of the day at home, performs no work during the transition to the office, and then resumes work at the employer’s location. The central question is whether the time spent traveling between these two locations must be paid, especially if the employee performed work at home earlier that day.
When is Mid-Day Travel Non-Compensable?
The DOL guidance clarifies that travel time between a home office and a regular office is generally not compensable if the employee is “off duty” during that period. Under the FLSA, an employee is off duty if they are completely relieved from duty and can use the time effectively for their own purposes. If an employee starts their day at home, works for several hours, and then decides to travel to the office—provided they are not required to perform work during the transit—the DOL views this as a period where the employee is relieved of duty.
According to the Opinion Letter, the fact that they worked earlier in the day at a different location does not automatically turn their mid-day commute into compensable time. This is a significant distinction that protects employers from having to pay for what is essentially an extended, flexible commute. The DOL emphasized that the travel time is not work time if the employee is using that period for their own benefit, even if that benefit is simply the commute itself.
The Role of Employee Choice and Flexibility
A key factor in the DOL’s analysis is the element of flexibility. When an employee is given the option to work from home for part of the day and choose when to transition to the office, the travel time is viewed more like a traditional commute than a work-related transfer between sites. The National Law Review highlights that if the employer requires the employee to move between sites at a specific time to perform specific tasks, the analysis might change.
However, in most hybrid arrangements where the mid-day travel is a byproduct of the employee’s flexible schedule, the DOL maintains that the “continuous workday” is broken by the period of being off duty. The travel time is therefore excluded from hours worked under the Portal-to-Portal Act, which generally excludes time spent traveling to and from the actual place of performance of the principal activity which such employee is employed to perform.
Practical Implications for HR Professionals
For HR teams, this clarification is a double-edged sword. While it provides a path to limit overtime liability, it also requires rigorous policy management to ensure the “off duty” status is maintained. If an employee is required to take a phone call or respond to emails while driving from home to the office, that travel time could quickly become compensable work time. To manage this risk, HR departments should audit their remote work agreements and time-tracking procedures. It is essential to clearly define when the workday starts and stops, and to communicate that mid-day transitions are considered unpaid break periods unless specific work tasks are assigned during that window.
Key Takeaways for FLSA Compliance
Mid-Day Commutes: Travel between a home office and a traditional office is usually unpaid if the employee is relieved of duty and performs no work during the trip.
The Continuous Workday Rule: This rule does not apply if there is a distinct block of time where the employee is free to use their time for personal reasons between work sessions.
Employee Voluntariness: Guidance is clearest when the employee chooses the hybrid split for their own convenience rather than being forced by a specific employer-mandated mid-day task.
Documentation is Key: Ensure that time-tracking systems accurately reflect when an employee clocks out from their home session and clocks in at the office.
Policy Review: Update employee handbooks to reflect that mid-day travel for hybrid workers is non-compensable unless otherwise directed by management.
Strengthening Your Hybrid Work Strategy
Understanding the nuances of FLSA travel pay is just one piece of the compliance puzzle. As the Department of Labor continues to issue opinion letters in response to the changing workplace, staying informed is critical. Employers should consult with legal counsel to review their specific hybrid work arrangements and ensure that their pay practices align with the latest federal interpretations. By proactively addressing these travel pay questions, you can avoid costly wage and hour litigation and build a more transparent, equitable workplace for your hybrid team. Is your organization’s remote work policy up to date with the latest DOL guidance? Now is the time to audit your practices and ensure your managers understand the boundaries of compensable time.
Disclaimer: This article is based on publicly available sources and is intended for general informational purposes only. We do not verify the accuracy or completeness of the information presented, nor do we endorse or share the views of any source on any particular matter. Nothing here constitutes legal, financial, or professional advice.