Bocko v. Univ. of Me. Sys.

• Docket Number: Docket: Cum-22-319
• Decision Date: 25 January 2024
• Citation: Bocko v. Univ. of Me. Sys., 308 A.3d 203 (Me. 2024)
• Parties: Robert BOCKO v. UNIVERSITY OF MAINE SYSTEM
• Court: Maine Supreme Court

308 A.3d 203

2024 ME 8

Robert BOCKO

v.UNIVERSITY OF MAINE SYSTEM

Docket: Cum-22-319

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine.

Argued: June 7, 2023

Decided: January 25, 2024

Matthew S. Wahrer, Esq. (orally), Thompson Bowie & Hatch LLC, Portland, and Robert J. Bocko, pro se, for appellant Robert J. Bocko

David Strock, Esq. (orally), and Valerie A. Wright, Esq., Littler Mendelson, P.C., Portland, for appellee University of Maine System

Andrew Schmidt, Esq., and Pamela Lee, Esq., Borealis Law PLLC, Portland, for amicus curiae Maine Employment Lawyers Association

Panel: STANFILL, C.J., and MEAD, JABAR, HORTON, CONNORS, and LAWRENCE, JJ.

STANFILL, C.J.

[¶1] Robert Bocko appeals from a Superior Court (Cumberland County, O’Neil, J.) summary judgment in favor of the University of Maine System (UMS) on all counts of his complaint and denying Bocko’s motion for partial summary judgment. Bocko argues that UMS failed to timely pay him wages as required by 26 M.R.S. § 621-A (2021)¹ and is thus liable for penalties in accordance with 26 M.R.S. § 626-A (2021). UMS counters that Bocko is exempt under section 623 from the requirements of section 621-A.² See 26 M.R.S. § 623 (2022) ("This section and sections 621-A and 622 do not apply to family members and salaried employees as defined in section 663, subsection 3, paragraphs J and K."). We conclude that Bocko is exempt from section 621-A as an employee compensated on a fee basis as described in 26 M.R.S. § 663(3)(K) (2023) and 12-170 C.M.R. ch. 16, § III (effective June 29, 2005). Therefore, we affirm the Superior Court’s judgment.

I. BACKGROUND

[¶2] The following facts are taken from the summary judgment record, which this Court views in the light most favorable to Bocko. See Chase Home Fin., LLC v. Higgins, 2009 ME 136, ¶ 10, 985 A.2d 508.

[¶3] UMS employed Bocko to teach a one-credit banking law course at the University of Maine School of Law in the fall semester of 2019. UMS and Bocko memorialized the agreement with a contract specifying that Bocko would receive one payment at a "monthly rate" of $1,000 for the month of October 2019. The contract further provided that the classes would take place on Tuesdays and Thursdays from 1:10 to 2:50 p.m., commencing on October 1, 2019, and ending on October 24, 2019. Bocko prepared to teach the course in July, August, and September 2019; prepared for the October 1 class in September 2019; taught the October 1 class; prepared for and taught seven more classes during October 2019; prepared course assignments in October 2019; and graded the assignments between November 25 and December 4, 2019. In total, Bocko taught eight classes, consisting of thirteen and one-third classroom hours, for the Banking Law course and spent an additional eighty hours outside of class working on course-related matters.

[¶4] In early October 2019, prior to receiving his payment, Bocko asked UMS why he had not received any pay. A UMS administrator told him that adjunct faculty were always paid once a month at the end of each month. UMS paid Bocko $1,000 in a single lump sum on October 31, 2019.

[¶5] In the fall semester of 2020, UMS employed Bocko to teach a three-credit admiralty law course as an adjunct professor at Maine Law. UMS and Bocko memorialized the arrangement in a second contract. This contract specified that Bocko would receive three payments at a "monthly rate" of $1,333.33 for the period from October 1, 2020, through December 31, 2020. The contract specified that the classroom portions of the course would take place on Tuesdays and Thursdays from 10:40 a.m. to 12:10 p.m., starting September 1, 2020, and ending December 4, 2020. Bocko worked to prepare the course in June, July, and August 2020; prepared for the September 1 class in August 2020; taught the September 1 class; prepared and taught twenty-five more classes in September, October, November, and December 2020; prepared a comprehensive final examination in late November and early December 2020; and reviewed and graded the final examination between December 15 and 17, 2020. In total, Bocko taught twenty-six classes, consisting of thirty-nine classroom hours, for the admiralty law course and spent an additional two hundred and sixty hours outside of class working on course-related matters.

[¶6] Before he received his first payment at the end of October 2020, Bocko asked UMS whether it was required to pay him in conformity with 26 M.R.S. § 621-A(1) ("At regular intervals not to exceed 16 days, every employer must pay in full all wages earned by each employee."). On October 28, 2020, UMS’s Director of Human Resource Operations and Supervisor of the Payroll Team stated in an email to Bocko:

After internal discussions and careful review of our current payroll practices, it was confirmed that you are not beingpaid in accordance with Maine law that stipulates certain employees must be paid at a minimum interval of every 16 days. To comply, we will be moving you to our biweekly payroll schedule effective immediately. This essentially means you will be paid next on 11/20 for pay period 11/01/20 to 11/14/20. You will receive pay for the month of October on Friday, 10/30.

On November 2, 2020, the employment contract for Bocko was revised, stating that his total pay of $4,000 would be paid in equal installments of $444.45 on the biweekly pay cycle from September 1, 2020, to December 31, 2020. UMS paid Bocko $4,000.05 for the admiralty law course as follows: $1,333.33 on October 30, 2020; $888.92 on November 6, 2020; and $444.45 on November 20, December 4, December 18, and December 31, 2020.

[¶7] In May 2021, Bocko filed a complaint against UMS for breach of contract and remedies under 26 M.R.S. § 626-A for untimely payment of wages pursuant to section 621-A. UMS timely answered, and Bocko moved for partial summary judgment as to UMS’s liability under section 626-A. UMS filed a cross motion for summary judgment on all counts of Bocko’s complaint.

[¶8] On September 12, 2022, the trial court denied Bocko’s motion and granted UMS’s motion, entering judgment in favor of UMS. The court concluded that (1) Bocko was exempt from section 621-A’s requirements for the timely payment of wages because he met the definition of a teacher under 12-170 C.M.R. ch. 16, § VI(B); (2) alternatively, Bocko was exempt from the requirements of section 621-A because he met the definition of a salaried employee under 26 M.R.S. § 663(3)(K) and 12-170 C.M.R. ch. 16; and (3) because section 621-A did not apply to Bocko, UMS was not liable to him for any remedies under section 626-A. The court declined to address UMS’s additional argument that Bocko was exempt from section 621-A because he met the definition under section 663(3)(K) of an employee receiving compensation on a fee basis pursuant to 12-170 C.M.R. ch. 16, § III.

[¶9] Bocko timely appealed the court’s adverse decision on his statutory wage claim under section 626-A.³ The Maine Employment Lawyers Association filed an amicus brief in this case, which we have considered.

II. DISCUSSION

[] [¶10] In an appeal from a ruling on cross-motions for summary judgment, we review de novo the trial court’s decision for errors of law. Scott v. Fall Line Condo. Ass’n, 2019 ME 50, ¶ 5, 206 A.3d 307. There are no disputes regarding the terms of Bocko’s contracts with UMS. The contracts call for Bocko to be paid in fixed amounts based on the number of credit hours assigned to the courses he taught and not based on actual hours worked.

A. 26 M.R.S. § 621-A

[2, 3] [¶11] When "interpreting a statute, our single goal is to give effect to the Legislature’s intent in enacting the statute. To achieve that goal, we first look to a statute’s plain language, taking into account the subject matter and purposes of the statute, and the consequences of a particular interpretation." Dorsey v. N. Light Health, 2022 ME 62, ¶ 11, 288 A.3d 386 (citations and quotation marks omitted). "In doing so, we consider the entire statutory scheme so that a harmonious result can be achieved." Kane v. Comm’r of the Dep’t of Health and Hum. Sews., 2008 ME 185, ¶ 12, 960 A.2d 1196.

[4-6] [¶12] As a general matter, we construe Maine’s wage payment laws "liberally for the benefit of employees." Dorsey, 2022 ME 62, ¶ 11, 288 A.3d 386. If the plain language of a statute is ambiguous, "we defer to the interpretation of a statutory scheme by the agency charged with its implementation as long as the agency’s construction is reasonable." Conservation L. Found., Inc. v. Dep’t of Env’t Prot., 2003 ME 62, ¶ 23, 823 A.2d 551; see also Corinth Pellets, LLC v. Arch Specialty Ins. Co., 2021 ME 10, ¶ 36, 246 A.3d 586 (upholding the Bureau of Insurance’s interpretation of an ambiguous statute within its expertise). "Statutory language is considered ambiguous if it is reasonably susceptible to different interpretations." Manirakiza v. Dep’t of Health and Hum. Sews., 2018 ME 10, ¶ 8, 177 A.3d 1264 (quotation marks omitted).

[¶13] Section 621-A(1) requires employers to pay employees earned wages at regular intervals not to exceed sixteen days. Title 26 M.R.S. § 623 provides, however, that section 621-A does not apply to "salaried employees" as defined by 26 M.R.S. § 663(3)(K), which states the following:

3. "Employee" [is] any individual employed or permitted to work by an employer but the following individuals shall be exempt from this subchapter:

….

(K) A salaried employee who works in a bona fide executive, administrative or professional capacity and whose regular compensation, when converted to an annual rate, exceeds 3000 times the State’s minimum hourly wage or the annualized rate established by the United States Department of Labor under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act, whichever is higher ….⁴

Section 663(3)(K) does not further define a "salaried employee who works in a bona fide executive, administrative or professional capacity."

[7] [¶14] Although UMS does not pay Bocko an hourly wage, the contours of the "salaried employee" definition are...