Blocking the Finish Line: Does the FLSA Exemption for Amusement and Recreational Establishments Apply to Marathons?

09 February 2015 Labor & Employment Law Perspectives Blog

Several years ago, at one of the numerous race events that have become immensely popular in the last handful of years, a race “volunteer” provided a bike escort, so that the elite runners at a half-marathon race in St. Louis could safely proceed to the finish line. The woman, as well as the other 1,000+ volunteers that day, were not compensated for their efforts by the for-profit race organizer that runs numerous similar events across the country. Nearly two years later, the volunteer filed a proposed class action against the race organizer, alleging violations under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) — among other claims — for failure to pay minimum wage.

The race organizer recently moved to dismiss the case, claiming that sporting events and races, like marathons, fall under an exemption to the FLSA for amusement or recreational establishments. 29 U.S.C. § 213(a)(3)(A). In order to qualify for this exemption, even organizers must show that their events are:

  1. “Amusement or recreational”
  2. Separate establishments
  3. Operating for seven or less months per year

There is no case law discussing whether the exemption applies to events similar to the one at issue in the recently filed class action lawsuit. The exemption has, however, been applied to baseball games and automobile racetracks. For example, in a case heavily relied upon by the race organizer in its pending motion to dismiss, Chen v. Major League Baseball, volunteers of Major League Baseball’s (MLB) All-Star Fan Fest alleged that they were owed minimum wages under FLSA. The court in the MLB case found that the Fan Fest volunteers were exempt because baseball events are for amusement or recreation, and because the event was a separate establishment that “took place at a discrete location over a discrete period in time.”

While the “volunteer” in the recently filed class action case still has many more hurdles to cross (including this motion and the class certification stage), the outcome of the lawsuit has the potential to have a wide-ranging impact on the recreational racing industry. Many of the major players in the race event industry are run as for-profit corporations, and therefore, subject to the FLSA’s minimum wage requirements. As those who have competed in these races well know, the large events require significant volunteer assistance in order for the races to be run safely, or at all. If these corporations are forced to pay the volunteers, the cost to put on a race will drastically increase, possibly leading to raised entry fees and less support for the athletes. Ultimately, the future of the recreational racing industry (at least the version that we know today) could hinge on the outcome of this lawsuit, and the potential that many others could surely follow if this one is successful. Stay tuned.

This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.

Related Services