In 2007, about 2 million workers were  earning at or below the federal minimum wage. The Number of Enforcement Actions Has Decreased, although Enforcement Remained WHD’s Major Compliance Activity

From 1997 to 2007, the number of WHD’s enforcement actions decreased  by more than a third, from approximately 47,000 actions in 1997 to just  under 30,000 in 2007. According to WHD, although enforcement actions  have comprised the majority of its compliance activities, the total number  of actions decreased over this period because of three factors: the  increased use of more time-consuming comprehensive investigations, a  decrease in the number of investigators, and improved screening of  complaints to eliminate those that may not result in violations. Most of  these enforcement actions conducted from 1997 to 20007 were initiated by  complaints from workers. WHD’s  partnerships and outreach activities constituted about 19 percent of its  total staff time. The majority (72 percent) of WHD’s enforcement actions were initiated in  response to complaints from workers. From 2000 to 2007, in planning and conducting WHD-initiated enforcement  actions, the agency primarily targeted four industry groups: agriculture,  accommodation and food services, manufacturing, and health care and  social services. WHD Does Not Effectively Use Available Information and Tools in Planning and Conducting Its Compliance Activities

In planning and conducting its compliance activities, WHD does not  effectively use available information and tools. Finally, the agency may not  sufficiently leverage existing tools such as hotlines and partnerships to  improve compliance with FLSA. WHD Did Not Change How It Targets Its WHD- Initiated Investigations, despite Information from Its Studies of Low Wage Industries

From 1997 to 2007, in targeting employers for investigation, WHD focused  on employers in the same industries despite obtaining information from its  commissioned studies on low wage industries in which FLSA violations  are likely to occur. Therefore, the investigations initiated by WHD may not have  addressed the needs of low wage workers most vulnerable to FLSA  violations. The Extent to Which WHD’s Activities Have Improved FLSA Compliance Is Unknown

The extent to which WHD’s activities have improved FLSA compliance is  unknown, because WHD frequently changes both how it measures and  how it reports on its performance. When agencies provide trend data in  their performance reports, decision makers can compare current and past  progress in meeting long-term goals. While WHD’s long-term goals and  strategies have generally remained the same since 1997, WHD often  changes how it measures its progress, keeping about 90 percent of its  measures for 2 years or less. Moreover, although WHD established a total of 131  performance measures throughout the period from 1997 to 2007, it  reported on 6 of them for more than 1 year. This lack of consistent  information on WHD’s progress in meeting its goals makes it difficult to  assess how well WHD’s efforts are improving compliance with FLSA. Recommendations for Executive Action

To more effectively plan and conduct its compliance activities, we  recommend that the Secretary of Labor direct the Administrator of WHD  to    enter all complaints and actions taken in response to complaints in its  WHISARD database, and use this information as part of its resource  allocation process;    establish a process to help ensure that input from external  stakeholders, such as employer associations and worker advocacy  groups, is obtained and incorporated as appropriate into its planning  process;  incorporate information from its commissioned studies in its strategic  planning process to improve targeting of employers for investigation;  and  identify ways to leverage its existing tools by improving services  provided through hotlines, office phone lines, and partnerships, and  improving its tracking of whether penalties are assessed when repeat  or willful violations are found and whether back wages and penalties  assessed are collected.
Why GAO Did This Study

Over 130 million workers are protected from substandard wages and working conditions by the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). This act contains specific provisions to ensure that workers are paid the federal minimum wage and for overtime, and that youth are protected from working too many hours and from hazardous conditions. The Department of Labor's Wage and Hour Division (WHD) is responsible for enforcing employer compliance with FLSA. To secure compliance, WHD uses enforcement actions, partnerships with external groups, and outreach activities. In response to a congressional request, we examined (1) the trends in FLSA compliance activities from fiscal years 1997 to 2007, (2) the effectiveness of WHD's efforts to plan and conduct these activities, and (3) the extent to which these activities have improved FLSA compliance.

What GAO Found

From fiscal years 1997 to 2007, the number of WHD's enforcement actions decreased by more than a third, from approximately 47,000 in 1997 to just under 30,000 in 2007. According to WHD, the total number of actions decreased over this period because of three factors: the increased use of more time-consuming comprehensive investigations, a decrease in the number of investigators, and screening of complaints to eliminate those that may not result in violations. Most of these actions (72 percent) were initiated from 1997 to 2007 in response to complaints from workers. The remaining enforcement actions, which were initiated by WHD, were concentrated in four industry groups: agriculture, accommodation and food services, manufacturing, and health care and social services. WHD's other two types of compliance activities--partnerships and outreach--constituted about 19 percent of WHD's staff time based on available data from 2000 to 2007. WHD did not effectively take advantage of available information and tools in planning and conducting its compliance activities. In planning these activities, WHD did not use available information, including key data on complaints and input from external groups such as employer and worker advocacy organizations, to inform its planning process. Also, in targeting businesses for investigation, WHD focused on the same industries from 1997 to 2007 despite information from its commissioned studies on low wage industries in which FLSA violations are likely to occur. As a result, WHD may not be addressing the needs of workers most vulnerable to FLSA violations. Finally, the agency does not sufficiently leverage its existing tools, such as tracking the use and collection of penalties and back wages, or using its hotlines and partnerships, to encourage employers to comply with FLSA and reach potential complainants. The extent to which WHD's activities have improved FLSA compliance is unknown because WHD frequently changes both how it measures and how it reports on its performance. When agencies provide trend data in their performance reports, decision makers can compare current and past progress in meeting long-term goals. While WHD's long-term goals and strategies generally remained the same from 1997 to 2007, WHD often changed how it measured its progress, keeping about 90 percent of its measures for 2 years or less. Moreover, WHD established a total of 131 performance measures throughout this period, but reported on 6 of these measures for more than 1 year. This lack of consistent information on WHD's progress in meeting its goals makes it difficult to assess how well WHD's efforts are improving compliance with FLSA.