What DOL’s new FLSA opinion letter says about paying for commuter travel during the workday

Hybrid work can blur the line between “working” and “getting to work.” On July 22, 2026, the U.S. Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division (WHD) issued new opinion-letter guidance for a common hybrid scheduling question: whether the pay clock should start when employees travel mid-day between a home worksite and an office worksite.

In FLSA2026-9, WHD concluded that the kind of optional, mid-day home-to-office travel described in the request would qualify as normal or ordinary commuter travel—so it is not hours worked under the FLSA. WHD also framed the conclusion around the scenario’s assumptions, including that the mid-day travel is offered as a voluntary alternative to unpaid commuter travel and that employees are fully relieved of work-related tasks during the trip.

What WHD issued on July 22, 2026

WHD released a package of FLSA opinion letters on July 22, 2026. One letter in that package is FLSA2026-9, which specifically addresses employees who work at home and at an office on the same day and then travel between those locations in the middle of their workday.

This matters because employers and workers often disagree about whether “time between job locations” is automatically compensable—especially when the employee’s day includes both home work and office work.

The plain-English baseline: what counts as “hours worked”

Under the FLSA, employers generally must pay for an employee’s hours worked (and overtime for qualifying hours over 40 in a workweek). WHD’s guidance reiterates that the core question is whether the time is spent predominantly for the employer’s benefit and is part of the employee’s required job activities—not simply a movement that happens during the day.

WHD also points readers to its plain-language “hours worked” framework in Fact Sheet #22 and to its compliance tool, the FLSA Hours Worked Advisor.

What FLSA2026-9 says about mid-day home-to-office travel

WHD’s opinion is tied to a specific scenario. It assumes, among other details, that the employees are fully relieved of work-related tasks during their mid-day travel and that the employer and employees have timekeeping policies and practices to capture and record all actual work time.

With those facts, WHD concluded that mid-day travel between the employee’s home and the work office is “normal” or “ordinary” commuter travel—the kind of travel that generally does not become compensable merely because the employee’s day includes work at both locations.

The decision points that affect pay

WHD’s commuting guidance and its Hours Worked Advisor highlight the key factor: is the travel time also work time?

For real-world pay and timekeeping decisions, ask:

• What happens during the trip? If the employer requires the employee to perform work-related duties while traveling, the time may be hours worked.
• Is the travel tied to a job duty? WHD’s advisor lists examples that can make travel compensable (such as providing transportation for other employees, picking up supplies/equipment while traveling, or stopping to pick up tools, receive instructions, or do other work before going to the worksite).
• Is the employee “between work locations” or just commuting? Even when someone works at both home and an office on the same day, WHD treats the scenario it describes as ordinary commuting—based on the assumptions in the letter.
• Do timekeeping rules match the facts? This opinion letter is not a blanket rule for every hybrid schedule; it depends on what the employee is required to do during travel and what the employer records as work time.

What employers and workers should do next

Employers should review hybrid timekeeping policies to ensure they distinguish between (1) ordinary commuting and (2) required work duties performed during travel—so the schedule, expectations, and recorded work time align with WHD’s “hours worked” framework.

Workers can use WHD Fact Sheet #22 and the Hours Worked Advisor to understand when WHD treats travel as compensable versus ordinary commuting. For pay disputes, the most important evidence is what the employee was required to do while traveling and what the employer expected during the trip.

For the full details of the scenario and WHD’s reasoning, start with WHD Opinion Letter FLSA2026-9 and the July 22, 2026 opinion-letter release.

Sources

• Wage and Hour Division (DOL) Opinion Letter FLSA2026-9 (PDF)
• DOL eLaws: FLSA Hours Worked Advisor (Home-to-Work/Return—Commuting)

Related News

• House passes FY2027 defense bill to codify “Department of War”—what changes, what’s next
• ED-OCR launches Title VI investigations into 5 medical schools: what to expect
• U.S. DDTC interim rule shifts suppressor exports from ITAR to Commerce
• FCC modernizes EAS/WEA alert security—what changes, what stays local