In Sandifer v. U.S. Steel Corp., the U.S. Supreme Court held that the FLSA does not require unionized employers to compensate employees for time spent putting on and taking off certain protective clothing if they have a collective bargaining agreement that excludes this time as compensable work time.

The U.S. Department of Labor’s regulations

Supreme Court.jpgIn the 2013 – 2014 Supreme Court term, the Court will hear and decide a number of cases affecting employers, including one FLSA case. 

Sandifer v. U.S. Steel Corp.: The Court will consider what constitutes “changing clothes” under the FLSA. Under §203(o) of the FLSA, an employer need not compensate a worker for time

woman with knife According to the facts described in her complaint, Kathy Minor was hired by Bostwick Laboratiries, Inc. as a medical technologist on December 24, 2007. Just a few months later, on May 6, 2008, Minor claims that she and several co-workers met with Bostwick’s chief operating officer to complain that their supervisor had altered employee time

Supreme Court building.JPGBy now most of you who follow developments in employment law have likely heard about and possibly read the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Wal-Mart v. Dukes, overturning certification of a class action sex discrimination case brought on behalf of 1.5 million current and former female Wal-Mart employees. (If not, our recent FR Alert on this case will get you up to speed.) While Dukes is a sex discrimination case, it is likely to have a major impact upon class actions in other areas of the law, including wage and hour lawsuits. 

Continue Reading What Wal-Mart v. Dukes Means for Wage & Hour Law, Employers