Would Saldona have been legally entitled to receive overtime pay at a higher rate? Why or why not? What is the maximum length of time Saldona would have been allowed to take leave to care for his injured spouse? 3. Under what circumstances would Aimer have been allowed to require an employee to take a polygraph test?

Employment Law

Rick Saldona began working as a traveling salesperson for Aimer Winery in 2008. Sales constituted 90 percent of
Saldona’s work time. Saldona worked an average of fifty hours per week but received no overtime pay. In June 2018,
Saldona’s new supervisor, Caesar Braxton, claimed that Saldona had been inflating his reported sales calls and required
Saldona to submit to a polygraph test. Saldona reported Braxton to the U.S. Department of Labor, which prohibited
Aimer from requiring Saldona to take a polygraph test for this purpose.
In August 2018, Saldona’s wife, Venita, fell from a ladder and sustained a head injury while employed as a full-time
agricultural harvester. Saldona presented Aimer’s Human Resources Department with a letter from his wife’s physician
indicating that she would need daily care for several months, and Saldona took leave until December 2018. Aimer
had sixty-three employees at that time. When Saldona returned to Aimer, he was informed that his position had been
eliminated because his sales territory had been combined with an adjacent territory. Using the information presented
in the chapter, answer the following questions.

1. Would Saldona have been legally entitled to receive overtime pay at a higher rate? Why or why not?

2. What is the maximum length of time Saldona would have been allowed to take leave to care for his injured spouse?

3. Under what circumstances would Aimer have been allowed to require an employee to take a polygraph test?

4. Would Aimer likely be able to avoid reinstating Saldona under the key employee exception? Why or why not?