Sandifer v. United States Steel (12-417) 
  ISSUE:
What constitutes “changing clothes” within the meaning of Section 203(o) of the Fair Labor Standards Act? 

Certiorari granted February 19, 2013 

Sandifer, in a collective action, sued the employer for violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) seeking compensation for clothes-changing time. The 7th Circuit affirmed a denial of compensation for clothes-changing time. 

The collective bargaining agreements (CBA) had never provided for compensation for clothes-changing time. The court noted that 29 USC Section 203(o), added two years after the passage of the Portal-to-Portal Act (PPA), excluded clothes-changing time from the FLSA if that was the practice in the CBAs. The court stated that the workers would receive something in return - a higher wage rate. The court agreed that the trial court was correct to rule, given the terms of the CBAs, the employer did not need to compensate for clothes-changing time. 

The US Supreme Court granted certiorari to review the 7th Circuit judgment.

Case below: Sandifer  v. United States Steel (7th Cir 05/08/2012) 
Official docket sheet 
Certiorari granted: February 19, 2013. 
Oral argument:  To be scheduled.  

Questions presented in petition for certiorari:   

What constitutes “changing clothes” within the meaning of Section 203(o) of the Fair Labor Standards Act? 

Certiorari Documents: