By Rebecca Gardyn

Q. I'm working for an organization that is hiring part-time employees, but makes them work full-time with no benefits. Is this legal? Should the Internal Revenue Service be informed about this?

A. To answer your question, it is first necessary to know whether the charity's part-time employees are "exempt" or "nonexempt," says Angela Reddock, a labor and employment lawyer who works with nonprofit organizations in Los Angeles.

"Exempt" means that you are paid on a salaried basis and are exempt from the laws that require that your employer to pay you overtime. "Nonexempt" means you are paid on an hourly basis and are paid for both your regular hours and any overtime hours.

From your question, it sounds like you are a nonexempt employee paid on an hourly basis," says Ms. Reddock. "If this is the case, regardless of whether you are a full-time or part-time employee, the law requires your employer to pay you for all regular and overtime hours you work."

Whether you are also owed benefits, however, is another story. In most states, benefits such as health, dental, and retirement-savings plans are discretionary and are granted based on an employer's specific policies and practices, says Ms. Reddock - and, in many instances, part-time employees are not entitled to such benefits

In fact, federal law does not require an employer to provide any benefits to its employees, regardless of whether they work full or part time, says Joseph Vater, a labor lawyer in Pittsburgh who works with nonprofit groups.

However, if an organization does provide benefits to its full-time employees, the definition of "full time" will usually be specifically outlined in the organization's benefit plan, he says. That definition often will be based on the number of hours an employee generally works in a week.

For example, an organization may provide medical benefits for full-time employees. If "full-time employee" is defined in the benefit plan as "a person who is generally scheduled to work in excess of 32 hours in a week," then an individual hired as a "part-time employee" but who has been generally scheduled to work more than 32 hours over several months could argue that any medical expenses she has incurred should be paid, says Mr. Vater. Since the organization had not been paying premiums to the health-insurance carrier for the individual, it could be legally liable for the cost of the medical treatments, he adds.

If for some reason the organization's benefit plan does not specifically define "full-time employee," most will spell it out in an employee handbook.

The handbook also usually describes who is entitled to benefits. If the handbook defines "full time" as working a certain minimum hours per week, a part-time employee could bring a breach of contract action against the employer, arguing that the organization violated its own terms and conditions of employment by not providing benefits to someone working full-time hours, says Mr. Vater.

Many states maintain laws relating to the payment of wages and benefits to employees, he adds. Some of these statutes will permit lawsuits against officers or directors of an organization, who may be liable if the charity is unable to pay the damages.

"That's why it is extremely important that officers and directors take whatever actions are necessary to determine that the organization's payroll practices are consistent with the employee handbook, if any, and the terms of the employee-benefit plans which the organization may sponsor," says Mr. Vater.

If, after reviewing your organization's employee benefit plan and handbook, you still believe that the part-time workers should be receiving the same benefits as full-time employees, Mr. Vater suggests bringing your concerns to the human-resources department or to a member of the board of directors. If you aren't happy with the answers you receive, consult a lawyer.