Loading...
04-25-02 Conrad Mansion MinutesPresent: Ritz Fitzsimmons, Everit Sliter, Shirley Miller, Rick Champoux, Tia Robbin, Betty Norem, Gayle Vidal Absent: Norb Donahue Rita called the meeting to order at 8:00am. The minutes were approved as corrected. Gayle reviewed personnel and employment issues discussed at the last meeting. Tia read parts of a personnel management policy draft she had prepared for Board consideration. Tia also noted that paying Lynn by salary and others by the hour may or may not be in compliance with law unless Lynn's responsibilities' are significantly different. It was agreed that we need to: 1) delineate responsibilities specific to each position, 2) modify the schedule of hours to accommodate the shorter hours and to provide managerial coverage at all time, 3) assess whether we need two assistant managers, and 4) establish Mansion office conduct guidelines. The Board agreed it was important to designate a Personnel Subcommittee to meet with Lynn about Board expectations and concerns and to ask for her recommendations about how to address these issues and other changes we may need to make to establish a more professional working environment at the Mansion. Rita, Rick, Tia and Gayle will meet with Lynn and bring recommendations to the May 16th Board meeting. Rita reported our prospective gardner's contract totals $7500 (copy attached). Although this may be a fair price for the work to be done, it was agreed that other bids should be solicited. Rick will ask his gardner to bid and Rita will ask Larry to submit a bid. A decision will be made in May. Rita noted that we have submitted a grant written by Teri to Glacier Country for funds to help reprint our brochure. Betty asked for clarification about whether Board members are to pay for tours. They do not. It was suggested that we arrange for all Board members to meet all employees. A Board portrait needs to be taken and displayed so that members of the public know of our involvement with the Mansion. The next regular Board meeting will be held at 8:00am on Thursday, May 16th at Hedges School. The meeting was adjourned at 9:20am. To: Lynn Redfield From: Board Personnel Committee Re: Mansion Management Guidelines Date: May 7, 2002 1. The manager will oversee all activities at the Mansion (cleaning, gift shop, restoration, public relations, hiring, scheduling, salaries and other tasks as needed). 2. A manager or assistant manager must be present during all operating hours. 3. Mansion business is to be conducted at the Mansion. Personal business conducted at the Mansion is discouraged. 4. There will be one manager and one assistant manager. Additional employees will be hired as needed. 5. All communications among Mansion employees and with the public are to be professional, friendly and purposeful. 6. The Mansion manager and staff are encouraged to attend continuing education workshops in museum preservation and management to assist them in carrying out their professional duties. Conrad Mansion Board Meeting Agenda for April 25th, 2002, 8 a.m. Item I Approval/corrections of last meeting's minutes Item 2 Report from Gayle V. on staff and former employee interviews a. Overview of questions and answers b. Recommendations • Direction of Mansion management (comments from Tia) Our expectations Possible co -management with Lynn & Larry? • Personnel issues • Staffing and employment procedures Difficulty in finding qualified employees Offering more hours to fewer employees (Lynn mentions she'll work 5 days a week to Teri.) • 2002 budget • Discussion and decision on gardnener's contract Item 3 Discussion on necessary Board committees Item 4 Other business Adjournment a. Grant application to Glacier Country for brochure reprint } �� J APR-19-2002 11:53 AM DESIGNWORKS 406 752 6445 P.01 %svo, IkTA ATV' t 7, eld. VV4 F-J-t� t' . CONTRACT This first year agreement ;:or gardening service between Miriam Ascher dba Phoenix Farms Landecaping (contractor) and the Conrad Mansion Board of Directors, Kalispell, MT for the Conrad Mansion grounds is as follows: 1. Spring preparation and Fall clean up of annual beds. 2. Do Spring planting of annuals (plantings to be provided by Louis A. Bibler and/or The Bibler Foundation,) 3, Do weeding and maintenance (mulch, deadhead, fertilize, etc.) of all annual flower bedtas often as required. 4. Commence the weeding .-Ln perennial beds. S. After 2002 season, re-evaluation will be done on balance of perennial gardening needed J:or following year (B). Bid price for all the above is $7500 per year, contract to be renewed annually upon consent of both parties. APR-19-2002 11:53 AM DESIGNWORKS 406 752 6445 P.02 Miriam Ascher dba Phoenix Farms Landscaping CONRAD MANSION DIRECTORS, INC. By: Data: Date: APR-23-2002 03:38 PM DESIGNWORKS 406 752 6445 P.01 04/23/2002 09:49 4067559527 NWAUTO PAGE 01 I FAX COW. ER SHEET TO: RITA FROM:TERI 4 PAGES INCLUDING COVER HERE ARE ESTIMATIONS FOR 2002 PAYROLL AS PER 'YOUR REQUEST. (not sure if Lynn bas 2001 ready yet?) U4ek APR-23-2002 03:39 Phi DESIGNWORKS 406 752 6445 P.02 04/2312302 09:48 4067559517 NWAUTO PAGE 03 SHOULDER SEASON GUIDES MAY 15TH THRU JUNE 13TH & AU(;. 19TH THRU OCT. 15TH Returning Guides; Narw Yeomans/ 4th mason - 2D0 ref, 0 $8.00 per hr. - $1,200.00 (now) $0,50 per hr,s $1,300.00 $1,00 per hr,- $1,400.00 Sylvia Wood/ 2nd aspen - 158 hr, $6.25 per hr. z $882.00 (now) $0.00 par hr.= $1,008.00 S 8.50 per` hr.= $1,092.00 Margot ,laumotto/ 7th mason - (waturing hours and guiding, but can only qua" on hours) - 120 hr. a $6.00 per hr. - $720.00 (crow) $6.50 per hr, - $780.00 $7.00 per hr. a $840.00 Nicks Schuld 10th season - (tralninrI hours and guiding, but can only guess on 180 hr: a $6.00 per hr. 11$900, 0 (now) $6.60 per hr. - $1,040.00 $7.00 per hr. - $1,120.00 Carol Holstae/ 3rd season -- (fill in gu ding, can amly gueaa on hours) - 60 hr. a $6.00 per hr.- $360.00 (ram $0.50 per hrr.= $390.00 $7-00 per hr.- $420.00 New Guldos hours 1084 Q Starting wages $5.25 per hr - $6,891.00 $8.00 per hr m $8,504.00 $6.50 per hr a $7,048.00 TOTALS FOR SkOULDER GUIDES. $5,25 per hr * $8,673.00 $8.00 per hr = $10,752.00 $8.50 per hr a $1 i ,f0.b0 $7.00 per hr = $$,780.00 APR-23-2002 03:39 PM DESIiGNWORKS 406 752 6445 P.03 04/23/2002 08!48 4067559517 NWAUTO PAGE 02 HOURS AND PAY ESTIMATION FOR 2002 MANAGEMENT Lynn Redfield - May 15th thru 4ct.15Eh - 780 bra, 0 ? Teri Furman - Mayl5th thru cctl6th .716 errs $ 7.00 per hr. _ $6.012.00 (now) $ 7.50 per hr, ■ $6,370.00 $ 8.00 per hr. - $6,728.00 $ 8.50 per hr, - $6,088.00 Carrie Nelson - Junel4th thru Aug. 10th - 344 hr,M $7.00 per hr.-a $2,408.00 (now) $7.60 per hr.= $2,580,00 $8.00 per hr. - $2,752,00 $8.60 per hr. ■ All 2,824.00 Management Totals: (now) $7.00 per hr.= $7,42+0.00 $7.50 per hr.= $7,950.00 $8.00 per hr.= $8,480.00 $8,50 per hrm $9,010.00 APR-23-2002 03:40 PM DESIGNWiORKS 40E. 752 6445 W 28f2802 0848 4067569517 NWrUTO PAGE 94 P. 04 SUMMER SEASON GUIDES JUNE 14TH 'rHRu AUG,I8TH Slenne Clayborn/ 2nd seem - 353 hr 0 $5.25 per hr. ■ $1,848.00 (now) $6.00 per hr.= $2,112.00 $8.50 per hr.- $2,288.00 Aspen Row / 2nd season - 344 hr. CD $6.25 per hr.- $1,806.00 (mv) $6.00 per hr.-* $2,01M.00 $6,30 per hr.s $2,236.00 New hire hours to fill, around 344 iir $5.25 per hr.* $1,809.00 (no* $6.00 Per hr.- $2,064.00 $l W per hr.■ $2,238.00 There are 216 hre that wail be filled Is we go, either by new hire guides or our "seasoned" guides $6.25 per hr.= $1,134.00 $11.00 per hr.- $1,298.00 $6.50 per hr.- !$1,404,00 $7.00 per hr.a $1,612.00 TOTALS FOR SUMMER GUIDES: GRAND TOTALS FOR GUIDES . $5-25 per hr.w $8,604.00 $8.00 per hr.- l$7,538.00 $0.60 per hr.= $8,184.00 $7.00 per hr.- $1,512.00 $5,25 per hr.m $13,167.00 .00 per hr.w- $18,288.00 $0.50 per hr.= $19,812.00 $7.00 per hr.= $5,202.0d ? tb rA FAX TRANSMITTAL TO: Gayle Vidal FAX #: 7 95 '755 5 7 V FROM: Tia Robbin RE: Conrad Mansion Policy Manual and 'Wage information Gayle: Here is a rough draft of a policy manual. As you cao see„ many of the details need to be Filled in. Also, I have attached a case which sets for the pertinent wage laws concerning overtime and exemption from overtime for administrative employees. I do not know whether the Director's position meets the criteria for an administrative employee or not. This is something we should discuss at the Trustee meeting. If you have suggestions that you want included in the policy before the meeting on the 251h, call me and I can add, delete or modify anything you wish. -- Tia (phone 755-2144) TonPW. CONRAD MANSION EMPLOYEE POLICY MANUAL Effective May 15, 2002 The following are the operating policies and procedures for the Conrad MansionV . This manual applies to all employees of the Conrad Mansion, whether managers, guides, maintenance employees, regardless of method of compensation, shall be provided to each employee upon employment with the firm. The Mansion Director is Lynn Redfield. All Mansion staff are supervised by the Mansion Director, and the Assistant Director(s), who report to and are overseen by the Board of Trustees. "Management" used herein is defined collectively as the Director, or her assigns, and the Trustees. 1. PAY DAY: Employees will be paid once a mouth on the last day of each month. If the pay day falls on a holiday or weekend, the check due will be paid on the preceding work day. 2. WORKDAY: The Mansion is open for business from _ a.m. to — P.M. Employees' work hours may vary depending on the shift worked, and all employees are expected to be at the Mansion at least 10 minutes before their shift begins. Shift assigpmettts are made by the Mansion Director. No lunch break is provided, however, employees are encouraged to eat their lunches on the premises, in designated eating areas, when time is available. 3. OVERTIME: Hourly employees will be paid overtime at the rate of timc-atnd-a-half for work in excess of eight hours in any one day and in excess of 40 hours during any work week. Payroll may not be issued for such overtime which has been pre -authorized by the Mansion Director, Board of Trustees, or someone appointed by the Director or Trustees to provide such authority. Overtime work will be rounded to the nearest one -quarter hour. 4. BREAKS: No formal "breaks" are scheduled for employees. However, if no tours are pending and the employee has fulfilled all assigned tasks, the employee may take a "'break." Any employee not engaged in work assignments shall not disturb outer employees, working. This includes activities in the Mansion office. The quarters are close in the office, and many employees need to be performing Mansion business in the office area. Employees are expected to respect other employees and their need for a quiet, professional work environment. S. PERSONAL BUSINESS; With the goal of limiting distractions to other employees, employees are encouraged to limit personal and social discussions and telephone calls. CONMD MANSION EMPLOYEE POLICY MANUAL PAGE 1 While the Mansion management encourages a friendly work environtuent, too much personal discussion can sometimes be unhealthy. Employees are expected to respect the privacy of others. Disrespect for another employee's privacy, or any behavior the Mansion determines to be inappropriate with regard to interaction between employees, may be grounds for immediate discharge. 6. WAGES: Wages will be established each year and shall remain in effect until the following year. 7, VACATIONS: No paid vacation time is provided to any employee. Should an employee need unpaid time off, the employee must request that time from the Director, or her assign in charge of shift scheduling. The request must be made at least 2 weeks prior to the time off requested. Whether the time off is granted is at the discretion of the Director, or her assign in charge of shift scheduling. Employees shall not be guaranteed any time off, and shall not expect to maintain their employment should they take unauthorized leave from employment. S. VACATION SUBSTITUTE: Each employee shall be responsible for helping the Director, or her assign in charge of shift scheduling, to obtain a substitute for any requested unpaid time off. 9. SICK LEAVE: If an employee is ill and cannot report for work, said employee shall immediately notify the Director. No paid sick leave is provided to employees. Any requested unpaid days off for "sick leave" shall be for the employee's own illness or injury, or absence caused by illness or injury to members of the employee's immediate family. Misrepresentation or misuse of an absence from work represented to be needed because the employee is "sick" (or any reason listed above), may be cause for dismissal. 10. HOLIDAYS: 11. EMPLOYEE FILES: All matters pertaining to each employee, including salary information, shall be kept in a separate employee file. Employee riles shall be kept confidential. No staff employees, other than the Director, shall have access to the employee files other than the employee named on the file. 12. JOB DESCRIMON: A job description which describes the requirements of a speciric job may be given to each employee. It's primary purpose is to clarify what the jobholder is expected to accomplish in the interest of day-to-day operation of the Mansion. Changes in such job descriptions may be made solely at the discretion of the Management. 13. PERSONNEL COMPLAIIVTS: Pcrwawl wmpluints shall be dimcftd orally or in writing to the Director. Should the complaining employee not feel comfortable presenting the complaint to the Director, it shall be directed in writing to the President of the Hoard of CONRAD MANSION EMPLOYEE POLICY MANUAL PAGE 2 Trustees, Rita Fitzsimmons at address . The complaints may be dealt with at that time by Director, or the President, or may be submitted for further action to the Board of Trustees. if the employee so chooses, personnel complaints made to the Director, or made to the President, may be documented and placed in their personnel file, at their discretion. 14. EMPLOYMENT CONFIDENTI'ALUY: Conditions and terms of each employee's employment are confidential between, the Mansion and the employee. Employees shall not discuss employment conditions or terms with other employees, except those of the management. This restrictions includes communications concerning any employment benefits, or any conditions of employment imposed by the management. No employee shall communicate concerning his/her terms of employment, or inquire as to anther's. All issues or employee complaints shall be directed to the Director. or to the President of the Board of Trustees as outlined above. 15. PROBATIONARY PERIOD: Upon hiring, all employees may be subject to a day probationary period. This period does not apply to employees who have worked at the Mansion as employees in the past and return to employment at a later date. During the probationary period, the Mansion may terminate the employment of the probationary employee at any time, and without "cause" as that term is defined by Montana law. The employer need not provide the employee a reason for the discharge. 16. CONTINUED EMPLOYMENT: No employee is entitled to continued employment without being subject to discharge for good cause. No statement by the Mansion Director, staff, Trustee, or any of its respresentatives shall constitute an "objective manifestation" of any agreement or contract of continued employment unless that statement is in writing and signed by the employer. 17. SCOPE OF THIS MANUAL: This manual is not intended to be a comprehensive and complete employee contract. The manual is to be used as a guidance mechanism for the topics covered in the manual. Any other topics or situations which may arise but are not referenced in this manual will be dealt with, by the Director or by Board of Trustees, or anyone assigned by the Trustees. This manual is also subject to change without notice. CONRAD MANSION EMPLOYEE POLICY MANUAL PAGE 3 By my signature, I acknowledge receiving and reading the Conrad Mansion personnel Policy, and hereby agree to the terns and conditions outlined therein. 1 acknowledge that nothing in the Policy guarantees my continued employment, and recognize that my employment may be terminated during my probationary period without "cause, " and after completion of the probationary period, with "taunt" as that term is defined by Montana law. DATED this day of , CONRAD MANSION EMPLOYEE POLICY MANUAL PAGE 4 783 P.2d 391 29 Wage & Hour Cas. (DNA) 1013, 85 A.L.R.4th 509, 114 Lab.Cas. P 56,199 (Cite as; M Mont. 121, 783 P.2d 391) 0 Supreme Court of Montana. In the Matter of the WAGE CLAIM OF Frederick C. HOLBECK, Cla meant snd Rees, v, STEVI-Wli5'i, INC., Respondent and Appellant. No. 89-231. Submitted on Briefs Aug. 31, 1989. Decided Dec. 1, 1980. Department of Labor and tnduatry issued order directing former employer to pay overtime compensauou and statutory penalty to Former employee. The District Court, Fourth Judicial District, County of Ravalli, Jack L, Orem, J., affirmed order, aW employer appealed. The Supreme Court, Hurst, J., held that; (1) credible evidence supported Departiu mt's finding that employee did not act m managerial capacity and was rot executive employee 0=mpt from overtime compowatioa, (2) employer was rot entitled to remand for purposes of preventing additional evidem, Atticrtled. West Headvotes [1] Labor Relations e=►1194.1 232AkI194.1 (Formerly 232Akl194) Before individual will be deemed executive employee exempt from overtime compensation, ertnployer must prove each element specitted in labor regulation goveira&* exemption. MCA 39-3-405(1), 39-340000). [21 Labor Relations 4=1517 232Akl517 Altlougb employee was hired to assist bowling alley manager, substantial credible evidence supported Deparumt of Labor and Industry hearing ofricer's finding that employee did not act in matlaiprial capacity and was not executive employee eUM$ from► overtime compensation; tmaployee's primary page 1 respoosililities relatmd, to customer service and rnaintetuauoe of bowling lands and equipment. MCA 39.3-405(1), 39-3406(1)q). [3 j Labor Relations 4m1301 232AkI301 Employer n required to record lours worked by its employees. [4] Labor Reel 6oms 4=1281.1 232Ak1281.1 (Pmmmrly 232A1c1281) If employer fails to record employee's hours, empioyee's records my be tied to determine amount of time worload for purposes of deWtnining entitlement to ova compensation; however, employee's records need not be precise. [S] Labor Relatim 4 =1519 232Ak1519 Substantial evldeove supported determination of Department of Labor and Industry that bowling alley employee should be coanpmmed for hoots roeconsumtod is exhibits subtuotod to hearing officer in hearing W dournmine overtime coutpeusation; exhibits were based on w=Uy schedules, seasonal duties and coat sms practice, and both employee and tormer mxwger of bowling alley testified its support of exhibits. MCA 2. 4--704. 161 Labor Relations 41=1291.1 232Ak1281.1 (Formerly 232Ak128I) As lung as employer permitted bowling alky employee to bowl while on duty, employee was entitled to be properly paid, even if pay iw uded overtime eompaneation. [7] Labor Relations 4=1451,1 232Akl431, i (Formerly 232Aki431) Employer was riot eadded to remand to mauluLe addhimw cvideme conceraing former employee's request for ovectNm empmomim for work duns at bowling alley, whm evido we souot to be intcoaad Copr. C West 2002 No Claim to Odd. U.S. Gout. Wor'bs 783 P.2d 391 (Cite as: 240 ri[orit.121, 783 P.2d 391) by employer consisted of testimony of three individuals employed by bowling alley concerning number of employees supervised by former employee, and even if testimony were persuasive, it would only affect one of six elements required to establish employee was executive employee eaaeaW from overtimde compensation. MCA 39-3-406(1)0). (81 Labor Relations 4l;- 1451.1 232Akl451.1 (Formerly 232Akl451) Conclusory allegation that owner of bowling alley was unavailable to attend original administrative hearing on fortner bowling alloy employee's request for overtime commotion was insuftieieut to entitle employer to preaeaat additional evidence regarding format employee's alleged managerial responsibilities ad number of hours he wonted. MCA 2-4-703. (9j 'Labor Relations 40=1451.1 232Akl451.1 (Fb meorly 232Ak1451) While condusory allegations on availability to attend Rearing c=Qr ning employee's request for Ovatim oompensation may be sufficient to shove good cause for failure of disinterested witness to attend agency bearing, it is insufficient when witness is am of owners of entity that requested hearing in first place. **392 *122 Noel K, Larrivee, Missoula, for respondent and appellant. -*393 Melanie Symons► Dept. of Labor & Industry, Deleon, for claimant and respondent. HUNT, Justice. Mw Department of Labor and Industry (DOLT) issued an order *123 directing appellant, Stevi-West. Im., to pay overtime wages of $3,288 and a statutory penalty of $3,288 to its former employee, Frederick C. Holbeck. Tba District Court of the Fourth Judicial. District, Ravalli County, affirmed the DOt I order. Stevi-West appeals. We affirm. Stevi-'West presents three questions fear our cansideradw., 1. Wes Frederick Holbeck an executive anployee within the max ing of ii 39- 3-406(1)0), MCA, and, therefore, exempt from overtime competntadw? PqP 2 2. Did Frederick Holbeck provide sufficient and accurate substa vda*m of his overtime hours? 3. Did the District Court err in failing to allow Stevi- West to present additional evidence? In October, 198b, Stevi-West, Inc., owned primarily by 'Tom and Karen Bauer, opened an eigbt-lane bowling center, lounp and snsacck bar in Stevensville. A few months prior to tine opening, the Bauers hired Dave Sears t9 maltase the center. la August, 1985, Sears hired the claimant, Frederick HolbwX under aq oral =%*Wnnant agreement. Holbeck's primary duties included attending the customer service counter, working on the automatic pinsetting rnachim end maintaining the bowling alleys. He also performed janitorial chores, drilled balls, orgauized leageuas, promoted the alleys, instructed bowlers and closed the colter after work bom. Stevi-West initially paid ilolbeck $1,300 per month. In June, 1986, after the manager, Sews, was laid off, Holbeck's wages increased to $1,6W per month. In October, 1986, his wages again increased, this tune to $1,900 per month. On December 31, 1986, Holbeck resigned frmm his position for personal reasons, On February 19, 1987, Holbeck filed a clam with the DOU to collect oveWma wages from Stevi-West. After a bearing, the DOLL beariap officer entered findings of fact, conclusions of law and an order requiring Stevi-West to pay Holbeck $3,288 as overtime wags due and owing and $3,288 as a r;tacutory penalty. Stevi-West petitioned for judicial review. Following briefing of the issues, the District Court affirmed the DOLT order. Stevi-West appealed to this Coun. The standard of review of an agency decision is delineated at ¢ 2-4-704, MCA, as follows: (2) The court may not substitute its judpvm for that of the agency as to the wei& of the evidence on questions of fact. The *IU court may affirm the decision of the agemy or rema d the case for fwtlarr proceediogs. The court may reverse or modify the decision if substantial rights of rho appeliaftt beet been prejudiced because; (a) rhos Wnti doadve findings, inferences, Copt, c West 2002 No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Wotb 783 P.2d 391 (Cite as: 240 Mont. 121, 0124, 733 P.2d 391, **39M conclusions, or decisions are: (v) clearly erroneous in view of the reliable, probative, and substantial evidence on the whole record; (vi) arbitrary or capricious or chmackTize<I by abuse of discretion or clearly unwarranted exercise of discretion. Thus, judicial review of factual matters is limited. The reviewing court will not overturn an somy's findings of fact unless they are clearly errotueocts. Pacts supported by substantial credible evidence are not clearly erroneous. City of Billings v. Billings Rroghters Local No. 521 (1982), 200 Moot. 421, 430-31, 651 P.2d. 627, 632. Judicial review of legal issues is somewhat broader. The reviewing court will reverse an agomy's legal conclusions if they are characterized by an abuse of discretion. Billings Pref►ghters, 200 Moot. at 431, 651 P.2d at 632. The first question raised on meal is whether Holbeck was an executive employee within the inwi tg of § 39-3-406(1)0), **394 MCA, and, therefore, exempt from overtliaAe GOxrupensaT9on. Generally, an employee is entitled to overtime compmAition for arty (tours worked in excess of 40 per week. Section 39-3405(1), MCA. Arttong the employees excluded from this general rule are those employed in a,jm,fideewytivo c i Section 39-3-406(10), MCA. A bona executive is defined in § 24.16.201, ARM, which provides: (1) The terry► "employee employed in a bona fide executive * * * capacity" in Section 39-3-4001)0) MCA of the Montana Minimum Wage and Overtime Compensation Act shall mean any OMPldYOC (a) Whose primary duty consists of fhb numap rent of the enterprise in which he is employed or of a customarily recognized department or subdivision thereof; and (b) Who customarily and regularly dirmts; the work of two or more other employees therein; and (c) Who has the authority to hire or fire other wnployees or whose suggesdons sad recommmilat m as to the hiring or firing and as to the advamenimt and promotion or any other change of status of other employees will be given partiaular Pale 3 weigM; and * VJ (d) Who customarily and regularly exercises discretionary powers; and (e) Who does not devote mole than 20 percent or in the cases of an employee of a retail or service establishment who does not devote as much as 40 peroeat, of his hours of work in the workweek to activities which are not directly and closely related to the performance of the work described in subsections (a) through (d) of this section. (Empbasis added.) [1] Befeave an individual will be deemed an ewudw employee exempt f -mit overtime compensation, the employer mast prove each of the elements of the above regWadoa. Rosebud County v, Roan (Mont.1981), 627 P.2d 1222. 1228, 39 St. Rep. 639, 646. In this case, SUM -West has failed to miner its burden. [2) Substantial credible evidence supports the DOLI hearings officer's findhV filet Holbeck did not act in a niaauagerial capacity. Although. Holbeck was hired to assist the marwger, Sam, the evidence demonstrates that his primary responsibilities related to aistOWer seuvitce and mainteaance of the bowling lanes and equipment. After Sears was laid off, lfiolbeck's responeibiLires remained the Same. The owners themselves, raper than Holbwk, filled the mmargerial void left by Sears' departure. Few factors nOicate that Halbock held a m ogerial Position. He was, not given the authority to malts major business decisions. He did not schedule employees or set pay rates, He did not handle money except to collect it firoom cusp mers at the customer service counter and to put it in safekeeping ores the flights he closed die center. He was not responsible for any business recordlreeping. Apad from arratiging for the exchange of free bowling for help fun high school students, be did not hire or fire employees. He had Little input regarding hiring, wig our p=Wting employees. Clearly, the record demonstrates that Stcwi West failed to prove elercteauts (a), (b), (c) and (e) of § 24.16.201, ARM. Consequently, Stevi- West failed to show that Holbeck was exempt frmtr overtime compensatku. The District Court did not err in affkming the DOLT "40r. no semid issue is whether Holbeck provided Copt. 0 West 2002 No Claim to trig. U.S. Govt. Worlta hi 783 P.2d 391 (Cite as: 240 Mont. 121, *1W, 783 P.2d 391, **394) sutl3dent and accurate substantiation of his overtime hours. [3l[41 The employer is required to record the bouts worked by its employees. Car jo v. Department Of Labor and Industry (1977), 172 Moth. 182, 188-89, 562 P.2d 473, 476, If the employer fails to record the employee's hours, the employee's records may be used to determine *126 the amount of time worked. The emtployee's records, however, nwd not W precise. The employee may substantiate his claim by proving "that he has in fact performed work for which he was improperly compensated and [produciaW sufficient evidence to show the amount ad extent of Mat work as a matter of just and reasonable inference." Carsjo, 172 Mont. at 189, 562 P.2d **39S at 476 (quoting .Anderson v, Mt. Clemens Pottery Co. (1946), 328 U.S. 680, 687, 66 S.Ct. 1187, 1192, 90 L.Ed. 1515, 1623.) [5] in the present case, Stevi West did not track the hours worked by Holbeck. Holbeck began remling his hours in October, 1986. To substantiate his claim prior to that time, he submitted exhibits reconstructing the approximate number of hours worked. The exhibits Were based on weekly e0edules, seasonal duties and common practice. Both Holbeck and the former manager, Sears, testified in support of the exhibits. cinder the circumstances, substantial credible evidence supported the fording that IMbeek should bo comptMated for the hours reconstructed in the exhibits. [61 Stevi-West also claim® that Mbeck should not be WMPW98W for ovettiune hours because he spent much of his time bowling while on duty. TesdmorW offered at the bearing indicated that much of the time Holbeck spent bowling was work related. Furthermore. Tom Bauer testified that be knew Holbeck bowled wbilo working. As long as Bauer permitted Holbeck to bowl while ou duty, Holbeck must be properly paid, even if the pay includes overtime compensation. [7] The last loads is whether the District Court erred in failing to allow Stevi-West to present additional evidence. After it petitioned for judicial review, Stevi-West filed a motion to present addhlonat evidence. Although the District Court granted the Motion, the order was buried in the court record. The order was not served on Stovi-West or noted on the court docket. Nor was then ti awr set for hearing. Noneth+alass, w®do act remand for further pr«'wdkgs- The statiute governing receipt of additional evidence provides: If, before the date set for heating. application is made to the court for leave to present additional evidence and it is shown to the sarioaaion of the court dun the aaTchftionat evidence is material and that there were good reaso►as for failure to present it in the procwdag b4 om the agency, the court may order that the additional evidence be taken before the ageaq Mott conditions determined by rite court. The apwy may modify its findings anti decision by reason *121 of the additional evidence and shall file that evil and any modifications, mw findings, or decisions with the reviewing court. (Eniphasls added.) Section 2-4-703. MCA. The evidence sought to be introduced by Stevi-West consisted of tes� of three individuals employed by the bowling cemer coaetniag the number of employees supervised by Holbeck. Evert if the testimony were persuasive, it would not be material to the acatari because it would affect only one of the six required elements of ¢ 24.16.201, ARM. The result would at differ. Holbeck's classification would not change to that of an exert executive mmpioy". He would still be eligible for overtime compensation. [8][9] Stavi West also sought to introduce The testimony of Kam Bm=, one of the owners of the bowling ocow, who was not prment at the administrative hem*. Although Karen's test owny regardinS Holbeck's alleged managerial responsibilities and the number of hours he worked would be material to the outcome: of this case, Stevi- west did not prat good cause for its failure to Introduce this evidence at to original hearing as is required by ii 2-4-703, MCA. In his 9FAavh supporting the motion to pment additional evidence, Stevi-West's attorney stated only that Kronen was unavailable to Wood the hearing. While such a eoncluuory assertion may be sufficient to show good cause for the failure of a disinterested witness to spend an agency hearing. it is hrstd` rent when tee witness is ate of the ownM of the entity titer requested the hettcirtg in the first place. Copr. © West 2002 No Claim to Ora. U.S, Govt. Worb 793 P.2d 391 (Cite as: 240 Mont. 121, *127, 783 P.2d 391, **3W Stmi-West does not allege, nor does the record show, chat it was given insufficient ttotice of the tlM and date of hearing. In fact, the administrative record demonstrates that the notice of the April 20, 1988 hearing was trailed on March 14, 1968, Under the circumstances, we cannot say **396 that Stevi- West has shown good cause fnr its faRm to present Karen's testimony during the administrative hearing. Per Afrmnod, TURNAGE, C.J., and SHEEHY, MCDONOUGH and WEBER, JJ., concur. $ND OF DOCUMENT Copr, 0 West 2002 No Claim to Orig, U.S. GOA. Wotb