With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". would not be applicable to him during the entire period w e facts is consistent with the text of the regulation, with precedent, and with the policy underlying the administration of the salary basis test of “avoiding] the imposition of massive and unanticipated overtime liability.” Auer, 519 U.S. at 461, 117 S.Ct. 905. AFFIRMED. 1 . Initially, plaintiffs claimed the City had imposed a total of four improper suspensions without pay. Two of the four, however, were permissible week-long Monday-to-Friday suspensions, and are, therefore, not relevant to whether the City had a practice of improper deductions. See 29 C.F.R. § 541.118(a) (1998) ("[A]n employee need not be paid for any workweek in which he performs no work.”); Childers v. City of Eugene, 120 F.3d 944, 946 n. 2 (9th Cir.1997) (<HOLDING>). 2 . Plaintiffs contend that their position is

A: holding that the flsa preempted plaintiffs fraud claim
B: holding weeklong suspensions do not violate the flsa
C: holding that the flsa does not preempt a state law contractual claim that seeks to recover wages for time that is compensable under the contract but not under the flsa
D: holding under flsa
B.