Camsco Produce Co., Inc.

16 Cited authorities

Corning Glass Works v. Brennan
417 U.S. 188 (1974) Cited 1,425 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding that an employer has the burden of proof to show that it falls within the stated exemption
Skidmore v. Swift Co.
323 U.S. 134 (1944) Cited 3,810 times 119 Legal Analyses
Holding that "the rulings, interpretations and opinions of the Administrator" of the statute in question, "while not controlling upon the courts by reason of their authority," were nonetheless available for guidance to the extent they had the "power to persuade"
General Electric Co. v. Gilbert
429 U.S. 125 (1976) Cited 802 times 13 Legal Analyses
Holding that a similar benefits exclusion for pregnancy-related disability did not violate Title VII and reiterating that "exclusion of pregnancy from a disability-benefits plan providing general coverage is not a gender-based discrimination at all"
Phillips Inc. v. Walling
324 U.S. 490 (1945) Cited 538 times 10 Legal Analyses
Holding that exemptions from remedial legislation must be narrowly construed
Brooks v. Labor Board
348 U.S. 96 (1954) Cited 300 times
Holding that an employer has a duty to bargain in good faith for one year beginning on the date of certification of the bargaining representative by the Board
Bayside Enterprises, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
429 U.S. 298 (1977) Cited 77 times
Finding the Board's conclusion "that these truck drivers are not agricultural laborers is based on a reasonable interpretation of the statute, is consistent with the Board's prior holdings, and is supported by the Secretary of Labor's construction of [section] 3(f)"
Farmers Irrigation Co. v. McComb
337 U.S. 755 (1949) Cited 145 times 2 Legal Analyses
In Farmers Reservoir, for example, the Supreme Court concluded that "the physical operation, control and maintenance" of "canals, reservoirs, and headgates" for a company that stored water and distributed it to farms through the company's canals were activities "[c]learly... not done on a farm."
Careau Group v. United Farm Workers of America, Afl-Cio
716 F. Supp. 1319 (C.D. Cal. 1989) Cited 1 times
No. CV 86-5695 JMI (Kx). June 30, 1989. Wayne Hersh and Geoffrey Gega, Finkle, Hersh Stoll, Irvine, Cal., for The Careau Group. Diana Lyons, Lyons, Macri-Ortiz, Schneider, Dunphy Camacho, Keene, Cal., for United Farm Workers of America, AFL-CIO. OPINION AND ORDER DISMISSING ACTION FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION IDEMAN, District Judge. Plaintiff is the Careau Group, a California corporation, doing business as Egg City (hereinafter "Egg City"). Plaintiff is engaged in the business of raising
Wirtz v. Jackson Perkins Company
312 F.2d 48 (2d Cir. 1963) Cited 17 times
Holding agricultural exemption applied to nursery corporation where temporary purchases from other growers, totaling 2.2%, 5.7% and 1.2% over three years, "were necessary to make up for temporary shortages due to defendant's own crop failures [] because of adverse weather conditions or blights"
Mitchell v. Hunt
263 F.2d 913 (5th Cir. 1959) Cited 21 times
Considering the FLSA's exemption for agricultural employees and stating: "To bring himself within the exception, the appellee must prove that not merely some but substantially all of the farming operations to which the practices are incident were operations of the appellee farmer himself."
Section 203 - Definitions
29 U.S.C. § 203 Cited 6,996 times 280 Legal Analyses
Recognizing that "custom or practice" under a collective-bargaining agreement can make changing clothes noncompensable

Camsco Produce Co., Inc.

16 Cited authorities

Holding that an employer has the burden of proof to show that it falls within the stated exemption

Holding that "the rulings, interpretations and opinions of the Administrator" of the statute in question, "while not controlling upon the courts by reason of their authority," were nonetheless available for guidance to the extent they had the "power to persuade"

Holding that a similar benefits exclusion for pregnancy-related disability did not violate Title VII and reiterating that "exclusion of pregnancy from a disability-benefits plan providing general coverage is not a gender-based discrimination at all"

Holding that exemptions from remedial legislation must be narrowly construed

Holding that an employer has a duty to bargain in good faith for one year beginning on the date of certification of the bargaining representative by the Board

Finding the Board's conclusion "that these truck drivers are not agricultural laborers is based on a reasonable interpretation of the statute, is consistent with the Board's prior holdings, and is supported by the Secretary of Labor's construction of [section] 3(f)"

In Farmers Reservoir, for example, the Supreme Court concluded that "the physical operation, control and maintenance" of "canals, reservoirs, and headgates" for a company that stored water and distributed it to farms through the company's canals were activities "[c]learly... not done on a farm."

Holding agricultural exemption applied to nursery corporation where temporary purchases from other growers, totaling 2.2%, 5.7% and 1.2% over three years, "were necessary to make up for temporary shortages due to defendant's own crop failures [] because of adverse weather conditions or blights"

Considering the FLSA's exemption for agricultural employees and stating: "To bring himself within the exception, the appellee must prove that not merely some but substantially all of the farming operations to which the practices are incident were operations of the appellee farmer himself."

Recognizing that "custom or practice" under a collective-bargaining agreement can make changing clothes noncompensable