DOL Opinion Letter: Are Your Timekeeping Policies Compliant?

By Allison Sues, JD, Senior Employment Law Counsel
Published June 23, 2026

A recent U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) opinion letter offers a pointed reminder to employers that timekeeping practices must accurately capture all hours worked, even when work occurs in small increments or outside scheduled shifts. The opinion letter highlights the following sticky wage and hour questions: 

Is Pre‑Shift Work Compensable?

Yes, if the work is integral and indispensable to the employee’s job duties. 

The DOL confirms that employers must pay employees for any pre-shift work if the duties performed are “integral and indispensable” to an employee’s job duties. Waiting in line to clock in or changing into a work uniform, where employees are allowed to change at home and choose to change at work for their own convenience, may not meet these criteria. But pre-shift work more closely aligned to their job tasks, such as putting on safety equipment or receiving handoff or update reports, would be compensable. In short, if employees perform any tasks closely related to their work before their shift starts - even a few minutes early - that time is generally compensable. A policy prohibiting pre-shift work is not enough; employers must actively enforce it.

Does the De Minimis Doctrine Exempt Employees from Insubstantial Pre-Shift Work?

Often, not. 

The De Minimis doctrine excuses payment for work performed in “insubstantial or insignificant periods of time beyond the scheduled working hours, which cannot as a practical administrative matter be precisely recorded for payroll purposes.” The DOL confirms that this is a narrow exception, noting that technological advances have made it possible for employers to track employees’ work time with increasing precision. Unless the work performed is extremely sporadic and brief, employers should try to catch and compensate for all pre-shift work completed. 

Are Facially Neutral Rounding Practices Compliant?

Not necessarily. 

Rounding practices must not only be neutral on paper, but also in practice. In this opinion letter, the DOL stated that a rounding policy that rounded early clock-ins forward to the scheduled shift time but did not allow early clock-outs likely violates wage and hour law because it exclusively benefits the employer if the employees are performing pre-shift work after clocking in. Further, the DOL noted that even facially neutral rounding practices violate the law if they have an aggregate impact over a long period of time to disadvantage the employees.

To ensure compliance with wage and hour laws, employers should: (1) audit pre-shift and post-shift practices to ensure that employees are compensated for all work completed that is closely related to their job duties; (2) maintain a written policy prohibiting unauthorized work outside of scheduled work hours for non-exempt employees and train supervisors to enforce this policy; and (3) test the long-term impact on rounding practices to ensure that it does not result in employees being systematically undercompensated.

For further questions on wage and hour law questions like these, HR Source members should contact us through the HR Hotline Online or at 800-448-4584.