Batch Review Job Descriptions for FLSA Risk

FLSA misclassification risk typically shows up as one of these patterns:

• Exempt JDs with non-exempt duties: A classified-exempt role where the job description lists primarily routine or manual tasks with little discretion (e.g., "processes invoices," "answers incoming calls" in an "exempt" admin role)
• Non-exempt JDs with supervisory language: A classified-non-exempt role where the JD says "manages projects" or "directs work of team," which are potential indicators of misclassification the other way.
• Vague primary duty language: "Assists with" or "supports." These roles are neither clearly exempt nor non-exempt and need human judgment.

Copy 10–20 job descriptions into a single document. Label each clearly with the job title and current classification (Exempt or Non-Exempt). If you have hundreds of JDs, start with a department that's had classification questions before.

Start a new Claude chat. Paste this framework prompt:

I'm a compensation analyst reviewing job descriptions for FLSA classification risk. 
I'll share job descriptions and I want you to flag any that contain language inconsistent 
with their current exempt or non-exempt classification.

For each JD, rate the classification risk as:
- LOW: Language strongly supports current classification
- MEDIUM: Some ambiguous language — suggest reviewing during next classification audit
- HIGH: Language appears inconsistent with classification — flag for attorney review

Apply these DOL criteria:
- Executive exemption: manages 2+ employees, primary duty is management, authority to hire/fire
- Administrative exemption: primary duty is non-manual work related to management/operations; exercises discretion and independent judgment on significant matters
- Professional exemption: primary duty requires advanced knowledge in a field of science or learning, customarily acquired by a prolonged course of specialized instruction
- Computer exemption: primary duty is application of systems analysis or software engineering (not IT support)

Do not make final legal determinations. Flag, don't decide.

After setting the framework, paste your first batch (10–20 JDs) in the next message. Format each one as:

JOB TITLE: [title]
CURRENT CLASSIFICATION: [Exempt/Non-Exempt]
JOB DESCRIPTION:
[paste full JD text]

Claude will return a risk assessment for each JD. Focus your follow-up attention on:

• HIGH risk: Prioritize for attorney review
• MEDIUM risk: Add to your next annual classification audit list
• LOW risk: Document that you reviewed and move on

What you should see: A structured list with risk ratings and brief explanations of what triggered each rating.

Troubleshooting: If Claude is flagging too many as HIGH risk (being overly cautious), add: "Reserve HIGH risk for clear contradictions between the job duties listed and the claimed exemption basis. Use MEDIUM for borderline cases." Adjust the calibration prompt if needed.

Copy the risk assessments into a tracking spreadsheet with columns: Job Title, Current Classification, Risk Level, Claude's Flag Reason, Action (Attorney Review / Audit Queue / Clear). This becomes your classification review workplan.