Unlock document.
This document is partially blurred.
Unlock all pages and 1 million more documents.
Get Access
Case 21.1
SANDIFER V. UNITED STATES STEEL CORPORATION
Supreme Court of the United States
134 S. Ct. 870; 187 L. Ed. 2d 729; 2014 U.S. LEXIS 799 [January 27, 2014]
FACTS:
Petitioner Clifton Sandifer and others filed suit under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 against
respondent United States Steel Corporation (U.S. Steel) seeking back pay for time spent donning
and doffing pieces of protective gear that they assert U.S. Steel required workers to wear because
of hazards at the steel plants.
U.S. Steel contends that this donning-and doffing time, which would otherwise be compensable
under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) is noncompensable under a provision of its collective
bargaining agreement with petitioners’ union.
The petitioners sought payment for time spent donning and doffing various pieces of protective
gear….a flame-retardant jacket, a pair of pants, and hood; a hardhat; a “snood;” “wristlets;” work
gloves; leggings; “metatarsal” boots; safety glasses; earplugs; and a respirator.
Petitioners’ desire payment for time spent putting on and taking off these objects.
The question before the court was the meaning of the phrase “changing clothes” as it appears in
the FLSA.
PROCEDURE: The District Court granted U.S. Steel summary judgment in pertinent part, holding that
Petitioners’ donning and doffing constituted “changing clothes.” It also assumed that any time spent
donning and doffing items that were not “clothes” was “deminimus” and noncompensable. The Court
of Appeals affirmed.
ISSUE: Are Petitioners entitled to compensation for donning and doffing safety gear (“changing
clothes”) when there is a non-compensable provision for such activity in the collective bargaining
agreement?
RULE: “29 U.S. C. Section 203(o) allows parties to decide, as part of a collective bargaining agreement,
that time spent in changing clothes…at the beginning or end of each work day is noncompensable.”
REASONING:
1. The Oxford English Dictionary defines “clothes” as a “covering for the person; wearing apparel;
dress; railment; vesture.”
2. The Court determined that “time spent in changing clothes” includes time spent altering dress.
Copyright © 2016 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without
the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
5. The glasses, earplugs, and respirator do not satisfy the standard. The time to put on these items
was minimal. The Court did not address respirators.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
In Anderson v. Mt. Clemens Pottery Co., [328 U.S. 680, 66 S. Ct. 1187 (1946)], the court held that
“the statutory workweek includes all time during which an employee is necessarily required to be
on the employer’s premises, on duty or at a prescribed workplace.” “That period, Anderson
explained, encompassed time spent ‘pursuing certain preliminary activities after arriving…such as
putting on aprons and overalls and removing shirts.” “These activities,” the Court declared, “are
clearly work” under the Act.
The question for courts is whether the period at issue can, on the whole, be fairly characterized as
