30 Cited authorities

IBP, Inc. v. Alvarez
546 U.S. 21 (2005) Cited 578 times 24 Legal Analyses
Holding that time spent walking between the locker room and the production area after donning protective gear is compensable work under the FLSA
Palmer v. Marion County
327 F.3d 588 (7th Cir. 2003) Cited 1,643 times
Holding that claims not argued on appeal are abandoned, and collecting cases
Kosakow v. New Rochelle Radiology Associates
274 F.3d 706 (2d Cir. 2001) Cited 496 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that reasonable factfinder could conclude setting up and testing X-ray processing machine was integral and indispensable because machine must be in its ready-to-use state for patients arriving at start of day
Steiner v. Mitchell
350 U.S. 247 (1956) Cited 417 times 17 Legal Analyses
Holding "old but clean work clothes" integral
Walling v. Helmerich Payne
323 U.S. 37 (1944) Cited 297 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding controversy remained where defendant "ha[d] consistently urged the validity of the [practice] and would presumably be free to resume [it] were not some effective restraint made"
Lamon v. City of Shawnee
972 F.2d 1145 (10th Cir. 1992) Cited 142 times
Holding that the City could rely on a 1986 administrative code provision, when the evidence that it established a 28-day work period was "uncontested"
Williams v. Tri-Cty. Growers, Inc.
747 F.2d 121 (3d Cir. 1984) Cited 138 times
Holding that a "failure" "to take affirmative steps to ascertain the Act's requirements" prior to a federal wage and hour investigation "preclude[d] a finding of reasonable good faith"
Weinstein v. Schwartz
422 F.3d 476 (7th Cir. 2005) Cited 74 times
Explaining that whether an action is derivative or direct in nature depends on who suffered the alleged harm and who would receive the benefit of the remedy sought
Franklin v. Kellogg Co.
619 F.3d 604 (6th Cir. 2010) Cited 52 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding donning and doffing of mandatory uniforms integral and indispensable to principal activity at food processing plant
Salazar v. Butterball, LLC
644 F.3d 1130 (10th Cir. 2011) Cited 48 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that a circuit split over whether donning and doffing personal protective equipment is considered "changing clothes" under 29 U.S.C. § 203(o) shows that the term "changing clothes" is ambiguous
Section 216 - Penalties
29 U.S.C. § 216 Cited 16,326 times 140 Legal Analyses
Holding employers liable for “unpaid minimum wages, or their unpaid overtime compensation”
Section 203 - Definitions
29 U.S.C. § 203 Cited 6,769 times 273 Legal Analyses
Recognizing that "custom or practice" under a collective-bargaining agreement can make changing clothes noncompensable
Section 255 - Statute of limitations
29 U.S.C. § 255 Cited 4,526 times 8 Legal Analyses
Recognizing that not all FLSA wage and overtime claims are willful
Section 215 - Prohibited acts; prima facie evidence
29 U.S.C. § 215 Cited 2,631 times 50 Legal Analyses
Recognizing as a protected activity an individual's “testif[ying] ... in any such proceeding” “under or related to this chapter”
Section 211 - Collection of data
29 U.S.C. § 211 Cited 1,299 times 6 Legal Analyses
Providing that employers must "make, keep, and preserve" records of employees' hours
Section 254 - Relief from liability and punishment under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, the Walsh-Healey Act, and the Bacon-Davis Act for failure to pay minimum wage or overtime compensation
29 U.S.C. § 254 Cited 713 times 44 Legal Analyses
Precluding compensation for certain travel that "occur either prior to the time on any particular workday at which such employee commences, or subsequent to the time on any particular workday at which he ceases, such principal activity or activities"
Section 785.13 - Duty of management
29 C.F.R. § 785.13 Cited 165 times 10 Legal Analyses
Placing an affirmative duty on employers to oversee employees, and not rely on a promulgated rule only
Section 790.6 - Periods within the "workday" unaffected
29 C.F.R. § 790.6 Cited 146 times 10 Legal Analyses
Defining "workday" as "the period between the commencement and completion on the same workday of an employee's principal activity or activities ... includ[ing] all time within that period whether or not the employee engages in work throughout all of that period"
Section 1910.134 - Respiratory protection
29 C.F.R. § 1910.134 Cited 116 times 138 Legal Analyses
Noting same about sideburns, skull caps that project under the face piece, temple pieces on glasses, and absence of one or both dentures
Section 785.9 - Statutory exemptions
29 C.F.R. § 785.9 Cited 10 times 2 Legal Analyses
Explaining the limitations of the custom or practice exception

Jones et al v. C & D Technologies, Inc.

30 Cited authorities

Holding that time spent walking between the locker room and the production area after donning protective gear is compensable work under the FLSA

Holding that claims not argued on appeal are abandoned, and collecting cases

Holding that reasonable factfinder could conclude setting up and testing X-ray processing machine was integral and indispensable because machine must be in its ready-to-use state for patients arriving at start of day

Holding "old but clean work clothes" integral

Holding controversy remained where defendant "ha[d] consistently urged the validity of the [practice] and would presumably be free to resume [it] were not some effective restraint made"

Holding that the City could rely on a 1986 administrative code provision, when the evidence that it established a 28-day work period was "uncontested"

Holding that a "failure" "to take affirmative steps to ascertain the Act's requirements" prior to a federal wage and hour investigation "preclude[d] a finding of reasonable good faith"

Explaining that whether an action is derivative or direct in nature depends on who suffered the alleged harm and who would receive the benefit of the remedy sought

Holding donning and doffing of mandatory uniforms integral and indispensable to principal activity at food processing plant

Holding that a circuit split over whether donning and doffing personal protective equipment is considered "changing clothes" under 29 U.S.C. § 203(o) shows that the term "changing clothes" is ambiguous

Holding employers liable for “unpaid minimum wages, or their unpaid overtime compensation”

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

Recognizing that not all FLSA wage and overtime claims are willful

Recognizing as a protected activity an individual's “testif[ying] ... in any such proceeding” “under or related to this chapter”

Providing that employers must "make, keep, and preserve" records of employees' hours

Precluding compensation for certain travel that "occur either prior to the time on any particular workday at which such employee commences, or subsequent to the time on any particular workday at which he ceases, such principal activity or activities"

Placing an affirmative duty on employers to oversee employees, and not rely on a promulgated rule only

Defining "workday" as "the period between the commencement and completion on the same workday of an employee's principal activity or activities ... includ[ing] all time within that period whether or not the employee engages in work throughout all of that period"

Noting same about sideburns, skull caps that project under the face piece, temple pieces on glasses, and absence of one or both dentures

Explaining the limitations of the custom or practice exception