Labor & Employment Law Daily Wrap Up, DOL NEWS—WHD opinion letters address compensability of commuter travel and remote-work activities under FLSA, (Jul 23, 2026)

By Patricia K. Ruiz, J.D.

Some travel may remain noncompensable commuting time, while certain remote scheduling duties and related travel may qualify as paid worktime.

The Department of Labor (DOL) Wage and Hour Division (WHD) has issued two opinion letters examining how the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) applies when employees perform part of their workday from home. One letter concludes that certain voluntary mid-day travel between home and an office can qualify as ordinary commuting time that need not be compensated. The other finds that some remote scheduling activities performed by a field service engineer are compensable work and, in specified circumstances, can make related travel time compensable as well.

Mid-day travel between home and office. In Opinion Letter FLSA2026-9, the division considered whether mid-day travel between an employee’s home and office must be paid when the employee performs work at both locations and the travel is offered as a voluntary alternative to commuting before or after the workday. The letter concludes that such travel can qualify as “normal” or “ordinary” commuter travel and therefore is not hours worked under the FLSA. According to the division, employers generally would not need to record the travel time as worktime or compensate it.

The opinion addressed three scenarios involving nonexempt office-based employees who sought flexibility to divide their workdays between home and office. The division concluded that the home-to-work or work-to-home travel described in all three scenarios would not constitute FLSA-covered work because the travel remained an ordinary commute that primarily benefited the employee.

The division stated that ordinary home-to-work travel is not rendered compensable merely because it occurs during the continuous workday. The letter characterizes ordinary commuter travel during the workday as a third category of noncompensable time, in addition to bona fide meal periods and off-duty time.

Regarding the first scenario, in which an employee chose to work part of the day from home to avoid rush-hour traffic and commute during the middle of the day, the division said the mid-day travel functioned as a scheduling flexibility for the employee’s benefit and therefore could be excluded from recorded worktime as an ordinary commute. The opinion said the same principle would apply where employees adjust commuting times to accommodate personal needs, such as caring for a sick child or waiting for a maintenance appointment.

Remote scheduling duties, travel to client sites. In Opinion Letter FLSA2026-10, the division examined a field service engineer who installs and services MRI systems and receives service requests before traveling from home to client locations. The employee asked whether time spent receiving pages, calling clients and other engineers to schedule appointments, and traveling to the first appointment must be compensated under the FLSA.

The division concluded that time spent receiving pages before other work activities begin is generally not compensable because it is incidental to the employee’s use of an employer-provided vehicle for commuting. The letter cites the Employee Commuting Flexibility Act and states that merely receiving assignments is generally incidental to commuting.

However, the division reached a different conclusion regarding client and engineer scheduling calls. It said that calling clients to arrange appointments and contacting other field service engineers when necessary are compensable hours worked because those activities are required by and primarily benefit the employer and are integral and indispensable to the employee’s principal duties of installing and servicing equipment.

Travel-time analysis. The division considered two travel scenarios in the opinion letter. In the first, the engineer completed scheduling calls before leaving home and then drove to the first client location. Based on facts in which the employee spent most of the hour before departure performing scheduling calls, the division concluded that the subsequent travel to the first client location was compensable. The letter said the travel was not an ordinary commute because the employee was required to perform substantial work immediately before the trip and work at the client site immediately after arrival, leaving little of the flexibility typically associated with ordinary commuting.

In the second scenario, the employee began commuting before 7 a.m. and performed scheduling calls while driving to the first appointment. The division concluded that travel time before the employee began making calls remained ordinary home-to-work travel and was not compensable. Once the employee began calling clients to schedule appointments, however, the workday commenced, and the remaining travel time until arrival at the first client location was compensable because the employee was performing principal work activities during the trip.

News: AgencyNews WorkingTime WageHour