The Legal and Regulatory Environment of Business

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Case 19 Case 19-1 (Chapter 19, p. 574) IBP, INC. v. ALVAREZ 546 U.S. 21 (2005) FACTS: The seemingly simple facts of putting on safety equipment at the beginning of work and the removal of such equipment at the end of work leads the Supreme Court to an opportunity to clarify the meaning of the Fair Labor Standards Act. Two consolidated cases address the meaning of regular versus overtime hours. ISSUE: For the production workers involved when does the workday begin and end? DECISION: In the cases, the donning and doffing of safety equipment are a part of the workday and the time engaged in these activities must be compensated. REASONS:
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: 1. The Court reviews the 1947 Portal-to-Portal Act and focuses on employees’ principal activities to define the beginning to and conclusion of the workday. 2. For meatcutters, safety equipment is essential. Thus, the time putting on this equipment and taking it off should be compensated. 3. Having decided the workday starts as the safety equipment is being donned, the time walking from the locker room to the meat cutting room must be a part of the workday and must be counted for compensation. 4. The return walk to the locker room and doffing of the equipment also is part of the workday. Case 19-1...
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Ask a homework question - tutors are online