employees. Auer v. Robbins, 519 U.S. 452, 117 S.Ct. 905, 137 L.Ed.2d 79 (1997). The Court adopted the position of the Secretary of Labor interpreting the salary-basis test to deny exempt status to employees who are covered by a policy that permits deductions in pay “as a practical matter.” That standard is met, according to the Secretary, if there is either an actual practice of making such deductions or an employment policy that creates a “likelihood” of such deductions. Id. 117 S.Ct. at 910. The Court found that the Secretary’s position was in keeping with the meaning of the “critical phrase” of the r or cert, filed, 65 U.S.L.W. 3342 (Oct. 22, 1996) (No. 96-652); International Ass’n of Fire Fighters, Alexandria Local 2141 v. City of Alexandria, 720 F.Supp. 1230, 1232 (E.D.Va.l989)(<HOLDING>), affd without opinion, 912 F.2d 463 (4th
holding that apprendi does not apply where the defendant was sentenced to less than the statutory maximum holding that passing the time of day with a customer in new york does not give rise to personal jurisdiction holding less than twothirds of the stock holding that the docking of one hours leave for daylight savings time affronts the concept of a salaried executive holding that the docking of leave or accrued compensatory time for absences of less than an entire day does not defeat salaried status