Home Care Overtime Rule Ruling: What It Means for Caregivers

Reviewed by Legal News Report

PITTSBURGH — November 4, 2026 — A federal judge in Pittsburgh has ruled that a U.S. Department of Labor regulation barring home care agencies from using a federal overtime exemption for live-in domestic workers conflicts with the Fair Labor Standards Act. In a decision dated October 29, 2026, in Intra-National Home Care, LLC v. U.S. Department of Labor, U.S. District Judge W. Scott Hardy of the Western District of Pennsylvania set the live-in portion of the rule aside, according to published case summaries, but only for the two home care companies that brought the challenge. The court left in place a parallel restriction on the companionship services exemption, saying it was bound by a 2007 U.S. Supreme Court decision.

The ruling matters because the 2013 “Home Care Rule” is the reason most agency-employed home health and personal care aides are entitled to federal minimum wage and time-and-a-half overtime. It arrives while the rule’s future is unsettled on several fronts: a federal appeals court covering Ohio, Michigan, Kentucky and Tennessee upheld the same regulation in April, the losing employer in that case faces a November 9, 2026, deadline to ask the Supreme Court to step in, and the Labor Department has proposed rescinding the 2013 rule but, as of publication, had not issued a final rule. For now, the federal rule remains on the books for nearly every agency, caregiver and family not party to the Pittsburgh case.

Key Takeaways

Narrow win for two agencies: A federal judge in Pittsburgh ruled on Oct. 29, 2026, that the DOL’s bar on agencies using the FLSA’s live-in overtime exemption conflicts with the statute, but set the rule aside only for the two plaintiff companies.
Companionship rule still stands: The court said Long Island Care at Home, Ltd. v. Coke (2007) prevented it from invalidating the parallel bar on the companionship services exemption.
Courts are not aligned: The Sixth Circuit upheld the same 2013 regulation in DOL v. Americare Healthcare Services in April 2026, and a Supreme Court petition in that case is due November 9, 2026.
The rule is still in effect: The DOL proposed rescinding the 2013 Home Care Rule in July 2025 and paused its own enforcement, but no final rescission had been published as of Nov. 4, 2026.
Workers’ private rights continue: The enforcement pause does not stop caregivers from bringing their own FLSA claims, and many states set their own overtime rules for home care workers.

What Happened in the Pittsburgh Case

The two plaintiffs, Intra-National Home Care, LLC and AgeWell Home Helpers, Inc. (doing business as AgeWell Caregiver Service), are third-party employers of direct care workers who provide in-home help through a Pennsylvania Medicaid waiver program, according to a VitalLaw summary of the opinion. They filed pre-enforcement lawsuits in October and November 2020 (Case Nos. 2:20-cv-01545 and 2:20-cv-01773), arguing that the DOL’s 2013 regulation, codified at 29 C.F.R. § 552.109, conflicts with the FLSA and is arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act.

The companies say the Medicaid program pays a flat hourly rate with no additional amount for overtime hours, and that they restructured pay rates to fund overtime within those limits. The Labor Department has treated that kind of arrangement as a serious violation, according to the same summary. Those characterizations come from the case record as summarized by legal publishers; Legal News Report has not reviewed the full opinion.

What the judge decided

Applying Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (2024), which ended the practice of courts deferring to agencies’ readings of ambiguous statutes, Judge Hardy interpreted the FLSA independently. On the live-in exemption in 29 U.S.C. § 213(b)(21), the court concluded that the statute names no employer, so the identity of the employer is irrelevant, and that the DOL’s bar on third-party employers “directly conflicts with the statutory text enacted by Congress,” as VitalLaw described the holding.

On the companionship services exemption in 29 U.S.C. § 213(a)(15), the court’s own reading also covered “any employee” who meets the statutory test regardless of who employs them. But the court concluded that the Supreme Court’s 2007 decision in Long Island Care at Home, Ltd. v. Coke, which upheld the DOL’s authority to decide whether third-party-employed workers fall within the exemption, prevented it from declaring that part of the regulation unlawful. Both sides’ summary judgment motions were granted in part and denied in part.

Why the relief is limited

The court said any judgment setting aside part of the regulation applies only to the plaintiffs, not to every agency the rule covers, according to VitalLaw and a Bloomberg Law report summarized by the labor law site OnLabor. That means other home care agencies across the country remain subject to 29 C.F.R. § 552.109 in full, and the decision does not change the obligations of employers outside the case.

Legal News Report did not find a public statement from the Department of Labor responding to the ruling as of publication. Whether the government will appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit had not been announced.

The Law Behind the Ruling

The Fair Labor Standards Act generally requires covered employers to pay at least the federal minimum wage and time-and-a-half for hours over 40 in a workweek (29 U.S.C. §§ 206, 207). In 1974, Congress extended those protections to domestic service workers but carved out two exemptions:

Companionship services exemption, 29 U.S.C. § 213(a)(15): exempts from minimum wage and overtime any employee in domestic service employment who provides companionship services for individuals who, because of age or infirmity, are unable to care for themselves, “as such terms are defined and delimited by regulations of the Secretary.”
Live-in exemption, 29 U.S.C. § 213(b)(21): exempts from overtime (but not minimum wage) “any employee who is employed in domestic service in a household and who resides in such household.”

For nearly four decades, the DOL’s 1975 regulations let home care agencies and other third-party employers claim both exemptions. The 2013 Home Care Rule, published October 1, 2013, and effective in 2015, reversed course. Under 29 C.F.R. § 552.109(a) and (c), third-party employers “may not avail themselves” of either exemption, even when a worker is jointly employed by the family receiving care. The family or individual can still claim the exemptions. The 2013 rule also narrowed the definition of companionship services in 29 C.F.R. § 552.6, capping hands-on “care” tasks such as bathing and meal preparation at 20 percent of hours worked per person and per workweek.

Coke, Loper Bright and the ‘express delegation’ question

The legal fight turns on how much room Congress gave the Labor Department. In Coke, the Supreme Court upheld the 1975 third-party rule, reasoning that the FLSA left it to the agency to work out details such as whether third-party-employed workers fall within the exemption. Home care groups later challenged the 2013 reversal, and in August 2015 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit upheld it in Home Care Association of America v. Weil.

Loper Bright reopened the debate. Employers argue that without Chevron deference, the plain text of the exemptions controls. Courts upholding the rule point out that Loper Bright left intact cases decided under Chevron and recognized that Congress may expressly delegate discretion to an agency, as the “defined and delimited by regulations” phrase in § 213(a)(15) does.

How the Courts Have Split

The Pittsburgh ruling does not sit easily with an April 2026 decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, which covers Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee. The table below compares the two.

Issue	DOL v. Americare Healthcare Services (6th Cir.)	Intra-National Home Care v. DOL (W.D. Pa.)
Decision date	April 1, 2026	October 29, 2026
Court level	Federal appeals court (binding in its circuit)	Federal trial court (not binding on other courts)
Companionship exemption bar, § 552.109(a)	Upheld as a valid use of express delegation in § 213(a)(15); Coke controls	Left in place; court said Coke prevented it from declaring this part unlawful
Live-in exemption bar, § 552.109(c)	Upheld to the extent the live-in and companionship exemptions overlap	Held to conflict with the FLSA’s text; set aside for the plaintiffs
Effect of Loper Bright	Did not displace Coke or the express delegation	Court read the statute independently, without deference
Who is affected	Americare and a co-defendant; DOL won liability, including willful violations	Only the two plaintiff agencies
Next step	Supreme Court petition deadline extended to Nov. 9, 2026	Possible appeal to the Third Circuit (not announced)

In Americare, in an opinion by Judge Jane Branstetter Stranch, the court held that the 2013 third-party regulation is a valid exercise of the Secretary’s express delegation and that this authority reaches the live-in exemption where the two exemptions overlap. Judge John K. Bush concurred, agreeing that Coke decides the case while writing that he believes Coke was wrongly decided. The full court later declined to rehear the case, according to Law360.

On July 21, 2026, Justice Brett Kavanaugh granted Americare’s application to extend its deadline to file a petition for certiorari to November 9, 2026, according to the Supreme Court’s docket (No. 26A91). Filing a petition does not mean the Court will take the case; the justices grant review in a small share of petitions.

Where Federal Policy Stands

The courtroom fight is unfolding alongside a regulatory reversal. On July 2, 2025, the DOL’s Wage and Hour Division published a proposed rule (90 Fed. Reg. 28976, RIN 1235-AA51) to rescind the 2013 rule and return to the 1975 regulations. The proposal would let third-party employers again claim both exemptions and would remove the 20 percent cap on care tasks. The comment period closed September 2, 2025, and the docket shows 5,566 comments received.

The department cited Loper Bright, the cost of home care, and Government Accountability Office findings that providers and states limited workers’ hours to avoid overtime. It estimated that up to 3.7 million agency-employed home health and personal care aides could be affected, an upper bound because some are covered by state law.

On July 25, 2025, the Wage and Hour Division issued Field Assistance Bulletin 2025-4, directing investigators to stop enforcing the 2013 rule’s third-party restrictions while the rulemaking is pending. A bulletin is internal enforcement guidance, not a change in the law. It does not bind courts, and it does not stop workers from filing their own lawsuits. As of November 4, 2026, Legal News Report found no final rescission rule published in the Federal Register.

Timeline

Date	Event
1974	Congress extends FLSA coverage to domestic service workers and creates the companionship and live-in exemptions
1975	DOL regulations allow third-party employers, such as agencies, to claim both exemptions
June 11, 2007	Supreme Court upholds the third-party regulation in Long Island Care at Home, Ltd. v. Coke
Oct. 1, 2013	DOL publishes the Home Care Rule barring third-party employers from the exemptions (effective 2015)
Aug. 21, 2015	D.C. Circuit upholds the 2013 rule in Home Care Association of America v. Weil
Oct.–Nov. 2020	Intra-National Home Care and AgeWell Home Helpers file suit in the Western District of Pennsylvania
June 28, 2024	Supreme Court decides Loper Bright, ending Chevron deference
Sept. 2024	Third Circuit revives the Pennsylvania challenge, ruling it timely because DOL sought to enforce the rule against the companies
July 2, 2025	DOL proposes rescinding the 2013 rule (90 Fed. Reg. 28976)
July 25, 2025	DOL issues Field Assistance Bulletin 2025-4 pausing its enforcement of the third-party restrictions
April 1, 2026	Sixth Circuit upholds the 2013 rule in DOL v. Americare Healthcare Services
July 21, 2026	Justice Kavanaugh extends Americare’s certiorari deadline to Nov. 9, 2026
Oct. 29, 2026	W.D. Pa. sets aside the live-in portion of the rule for the two plaintiffs only
Nov. 9, 2026	Deadline for Americare’s Supreme Court petition

Who Is Affected

Home care workers

Agency-employed aides who live in a client’s home or provide companionship and personal care remain entitled to federal minimum wage and overtime under the 2013 rule, unless they work for one of the two plaintiff agencies. Workers employed directly by a family, rather than through an agency, were never covered by the third-party bar; the family can claim the exemptions if the job meets the regulatory tests.

Home care agencies

For agencies other than the plaintiffs, the ruling does not create a new exemption. Agencies in the Sixth Circuit face binding appellate precedent upholding the rule. Agencies elsewhere face a patchwork of district court decisions, a paused federal enforcement policy and continuing exposure to private lawsuits.

Families and Medicaid programs

Families who hire through agencies and state Medicaid programs that set flat hourly reimbursement rates are directly affected by how overtime costs are handled. The DOL’s 2025 proposal said overtime costs have led some providers and states to cap caregivers’ hours, which can mean more caregiver turnover for clients.

What Happens Next

Supreme Court petition (Nov. 9, 2026): If Americare files, the government will have a chance to respond, and the Court could decide whether to hear the case in the coming months. A disagreement among lower courts can make review more likely, but it is not guaranteed.
Possible appeal in Pittsburgh: Either side could seek review in the Third Circuit, which has already heard this case once on timeliness.
Final DOL rule: If the department finalizes the rescission, third-party employers could again claim the exemptions going forward. A final rule would likely face its own legal challenges and would not by itself erase past liability.
State law: Many states set their own minimum wage and overtime rules for home care and domestic workers, and those rules apply regardless of what happens to the federal regulation.

What Readers Should Know

This section is general information, not legal advice. Wage rules depend on the facts of each job and on state law.

Check who your employer is. The federal third-party bar applies to agencies and other third-party employers, not to families who hire a caregiver directly.
Keep your own records. Caregivers can track hours worked, including overnight and on-call time, along with pay stubs. Live-in arrangements often raise questions about sleep and meal periods.
Look at state law. States including California, New York and Pennsylvania have their own rules for home care or domestic workers. A state agency or state labor department website is a good starting point.
Mind the clock. FLSA claims generally must be filed within two years, or three years for willful violations (29 U.S.C. § 255(a)). Unpaid overtime can carry an equal amount in liquidated damages (29 U.S.C. § 216(b)).
Agencies should not rely on this ruling. Outside the two plaintiffs, the 2013 rule remains in effect, and the federal enforcement pause does not prevent private claims.
Get individual advice. Workers and employers with specific questions can contact the DOL’s Wage and Hour Division, a state labor agency, a legal aid organization or a licensed employment attorney.

For more on wage issues, see our guides on final paycheck questions and unpaid commissions after quitting, and browse all Work & Pay coverage. Readers with information about home care pay practices can submit a tip. More stories are on our latest news page.

Frequently Asked Questions

Did a court strike down the federal home care overtime rule?

Not nationwide. On October 29, 2026, a federal judge in the Western District of Pennsylvania ruled that the Labor Department’s bar on agencies using the live-in overtime exemption conflicts with the Fair Labor Standards Act, but set it aside only for the two home care companies that sued. The rule remains in effect for other employers.

Are home care aides still entitled to overtime?

Generally, yes, if they are employed by an agency or other third-party employer. Under 29 C.F.R. § 552.109, third-party employers cannot claim the companionship or live-in exemptions. Workers employed directly by a family may be treated differently, and state law may provide additional protections.

What is the difference between the companionship and live-in exemptions?

The companionship services exemption in 29 U.S.C. § 213(a)(15) covers both minimum wage and overtime for workers who provide fellowship and protection to people unable to care for themselves. The live-in exemption in 29 U.S.C. § 213(b)(21) covers only overtime for domestic workers who reside in the household.

Has the Department of Labor repealed the 2013 Home Care Rule?

No final repeal had been published as of November 4, 2026. The department proposed rescinding the rule on July 2, 2025, and issued Field Assistance Bulletin 2025-4 pausing its own enforcement of the third-party restrictions while the rulemaking is pending.

Can caregivers still sue for unpaid overtime while DOL enforcement is paused?

Yes. The enforcement pause applies to the Wage and Hour Division’s investigators and does not bar private lawsuits. FLSA claims generally must be filed within two years, or three years for willful violations.

Could the Supreme Court decide this issue?

Possibly. The employer that lost in the Sixth Circuit in DOL v. Americare Healthcare Services has until November 9, 2026, to file a petition for certiorari. The Court decides which cases to hear and grants review in a small share of petitions.

Sources

Legal disclaimer: Legal News Report is a news publication. It is not a law firm, does not provide legal advice and does not refer readers to attorneys. This article is for general informational purposes and reflects information available as of its publication date; laws and court decisions may change. Read our legal disclaimer, editorial standards and corrections policy.

Federal Judge Says Labor Department Overstepped on Live-In Home Care Overtime Rule, but Relief Is Limited to Two Agencies