|
|
|
Newest employment law cases Summaries and links to full text |
Emailed directly to you and online all the time |
|
United States Supreme Court Employment Law Cases
All pending employment law cases - click here |
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)
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:
|
|