Outdoor Recreational Outfitting and Guiding Act
- Sponsor
- Rep. Owens, Burgess [R-UT-4]
- Committees
- Education and Workforce Committee (primary)
- Last action
- May 19, 2025
Bottom line
H.R. 3499 seeks to relieve seasonal or low-volume outdoor recreation businesses from federal wage and hour regulations, potentially impacting employee compensation and business operating costs.
What it actually does
This bill amends the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (FLSA) to create a new exemption from federal minimum wage and overtime requirements for certain employees in the outdoor recreational outfitting and guiding services industry. The exemption applies to businesses that operate for no more than seven months in any calendar year, or whose average receipts for any six months of the preceding calendar year were not more than one-third of their average receipts for the other six months of that year.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue this exemption is crucial for small, seasonal outdoor recreation businesses, such as rafting companies, hunting guides, or ski resorts, which often face unique operational challenges due to their seasonal nature and fluctuating revenues. They contend that current FLSA requirements impose undue administrative and financial burdens, making it difficult for these businesses to remain competitive and offer flexible employment opportunities. This bill would allow them to better manage labor costs and adapt to the specific demands of their industry, potentially preserving jobs and promoting economic activity in rural and recreational areas.
Opponents contend
Opponents would likely argue that exempting these employees from minimum wage and overtime protections could lead to lower wages and longer hours for workers in the outdoor recreation sector. They might contend that all workers, regardless of industry or seasonality, deserve basic labor protections to ensure fair compensation and prevent exploitation. Critics could also raise concerns that such an exemption might create a precedent for other industries seeking to bypass FLSA requirements, potentially eroding worker protections more broadly.
The bill is very short and straightforward, making it highly accessible for any reader to understand its core provisions quickly.
Section 2, amending Section 13(a) of the Fair Labor Standards Act (29 U.S.C. 213(a))
Exemption for Outdoor Recreational Outfitting and Guiding Services Employees
This provision adds a new category of employees who are not subject to federal minimum wage and overtime pay requirements under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Specifically, it exempts employees who primarily work in outdoor recreational outfitting or guiding services, including equipment rentals. This exemption applies only if the employer business either operates for no more than seven months in a calendar year or if its average receipts for any six months of the preceding year were no more than one-third of its average receipts for the other six months.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that this exemption is vital for the economic viability of seasonal outdoor recreation businesses, which often struggle with the fixed costs and administrative burdens of FLSA compliance during their limited operating windows. They contend it allows these businesses to offer more competitive pricing and maintain employment levels, especially in remote or rural areas where such services are a primary economic driver.
Critics contend
Critics would argue that this provision undermines fundamental worker protections, potentially leading to exploitation of employees who often work long hours in physically demanding jobs. They believe that all workers, regardless of industry, deserve the basic protections of minimum wage and overtime to ensure a living wage and fair treatment, and that carving out exemptions weakens the overall labor standard.
Tradeoffs
The provision balances the desire to reduce regulatory burdens and support the economic viability of seasonal outdoor recreation businesses against the potential for reduced wage and hour protections for their employees. It highlights a tension between business flexibility and worker safeguards, particularly in industries with unique operational models.