Labor & Employment Law Daily Wrap Up, WAGE-HOUR—OVERTIME—D. Alaska: Wind turbine technician was not entitled to overtime pay for overnight stays, (May 1, 2025)

By Jason Albright, J.D.

The technician alleged that, due to inclement weather, he had to stay overnight at a remote job site in Alaska.

General Electric International, Inc., is entitled to summary judgment against the FLSA overtime claims of a wind turbine technician who alleged that he should be paid for time when he was “stuck overnight” on an island in Alaska in the course of his repair and maintenance work. Whether time spent overnight is compensable depends on what the employee is required to do and does during that time, and the technician did not argue or cite evidence to show that he spent any time performing his repair or maintenance duties after 3:00 p.m. There was also no evidence to support a finding that he was on call in a working capacity while remaining overnight on the island, nor evidence of any agreement that would support overtime pay (Lawrence v. General Electric International, Inc., No. 3:23-cv-00218-HRH (D. Alaska Apr. 29, 2025)).

Wind turbine technician. As a wind technician for GE, the plaintiff was responsible for monitoring, repairing, and maintaining GE wind turbines. To start a typical workday, he would arrive at GE’s Anchorage office for a 7:00 a.m. start time. The day would begin with logging into GE’s computer system to check operations data for several wind turbines GE operates on Fire Island.

Fire Island. The Fire Island at issue is a small island located a few miles from downtown Anchorage and is accessible only by plane. On days where the data shows a turbine needs repair or maintenance, three technicians are flown via chartered plane to Fire Island to conduct the needed operations. Once they are “dropped” at the location, the plane departs. The crew completes all needed tasks throughout the day and then a plane returns to fly them back to Anchorage by 3:00 p.m., which is the end of the crew’s eight-hour shift.

Bunkhouse stays. On occasion, weather prevents the chartered plane from returning to Fire Island or prevents the crew from completing the needed repairs in the turbine’s hub or within the turbine’s tower, and in those instances, the crew must stay overnight in a trailer-style bunkhouse on the island, and while on the island overnight, at the end of their regular shifts, crew members have free time.

Technician’s experience. When the technician was stuck overnight on Fire Island, he “engaged in personal activities,” according to the court. He read books, watched video and social media content on his phone, walked the beach, took pictures, and drank beer or whiskey. He was also allowed to bring his dog to the island and often did so. Though crew members sometimes talked about work, the chats were not mandatory, and the technician often avoided those discussions. He was also never awakened from sleep to perform any work-related tasks.

Additional pay. In January 2023, in response to complaints about the overnight situation, GE began paying technicians an additional eight hours of wages as “bonus pay” when they had to stay overnight on Fire Island.

Lawsuit and present motion. Arguing that the eight additional hours of pay was insufficient, the technician filed suit against GE in September 2023, claiming that GE violated the FLSA by failing to pay him for “hours that he worked for [GE] during the overnight shifts he spent on Fire Island.” More specifically, he alleged that he spent 1,200 overnight hours on Fire Island between September 21, 2020, and September 20, 2023, for which he was not compensated and that these hours, which were in excess of his regularly scheduled 40-hour work week, constituted overtime hours that must be paid accordingly.

GE moved for summary judgment, arguing that the technician failed to show that he worked enough hours to be entitled to overtime on any specific week, and that his entire post-shift time on the island was non-compensable under the FLSA, its accompanying regulations, and applicable case law.

Working time. Granting GE’s motion, the court observed that, though the technician’s work responsibilities precipitated his overnight hours on Fire Island, those hours were, nonetheless, not compensable under the FLSA and accompanying regulations.

No repair or maintenance duties. Whether time spent overnight is compensable under the FLSA depends on what the employee is required to do and does during that time, said the court, and the technician did not argue or cite evidence to show that he spent any time performing his repair or maintenance duties after 3:00 p.m. And though there were chats about work between his coworkers, they were not required debriefings and he, in fact, avoided such conversations.

Not on-call. Nor was his time on the island compensable on-call time. Time spent waiting is only working time if it is spent “primarily for the benefit of the employer and his business,” and the technician was not engaged by GE to wait and be ready for work while stuck on the island. He did not cite evidence to show that he was ever asked to perform work tasks or stay ready to perform such tasks after his regular shift was done, and indeed, the record showed that he was never awakened for work-related reasons. “He engaged in personal activities while on the island, including using the internet, reading, being with his dog, and even having alcoholic drinks,” said the court. “At most, [he] simply waited on the island to engage in work the next morning.”

No supporting agreement. Finally, there was no evidence of an agreement that would support overtime pay. To the contrary, said the court, “given the record presented here, the parties seem to have had a constructive agreement that time spent waylaid on Fire Island was not compensable overtime but rather time subjected to bonus pay, which increased substantially in early 2023.” The technician “was aware of GE’s compensation policy with regard to overnight stays on Fire Island and continued to work under that policy until September 2023.”

GE’s motion for summary judgment was granted and the technician’s complaint dismissed.

The case is No. 3:23-cv-00218-HRH.

Judge: Holland, H.

Attorneys: Isaac D. Zorea (Law Offices of Isaac D. Zorea) for Michael Lawrence. Gregory S. Fisher (Littler Mendelson) for General Electric International, Inc.

Companies: General Electric International, Inc.

Cases: WageHour Overtime WorkingTime AlaskaNews