|
|
http://www.dol.gov/sol/media/briefs/tumsupp-8-18-03.htm
It's a long article and requires close reading, but here is an excerpt:
...
Whether waiting time is compensable "hours worked" within the meaning of the FLSA depends on whether an employee is "waiting to be engaged" or "engaged to wait." See generally, Skidmore v. Swift & Co., 323 U.S. 134, 136 (1944). In Skidmore, 323 U.S. at 136, the Court stated that "hours worked" under the FLSA is not limited to active labor: "No principle of law found either in the statute or in Court decisions precludes waiting time from also being working time," and "[f]acts may show that the employee was engaged to wait, or they may show that he waited to be engaged." Accord Owens v. Local No. 169, Ass'n of W. Pulp & Paper Workers, 971 F.2d 347, 350-51 (9th Cir. 1992). See also 29 C.F.R. 785.7, 785.14; The Fair Labor Standards Act § 8.II.B (Ellen C. Kearns and Monica Gallagher eds. 1999).
Thus, "idle" or waiting time is compensable "work" under the FLSA where it is controlled by the employer and is spent predominantly for the employer's benefit. See, e.g., Armour & Co. v. Wantock, 323 U.S. 126, 133 (1944) (a companion case to Skidmore).(4) The Secretary's interpretive regulations explain that an employee is "engaged to wait," and therefore performing work, when the periods of inactivity are unpredictable and of short duration:
In either event the employee is unable to use the time effectively for his own purposes. It belongs to and is controlled by the employer. In [such] cases waiting is an integral part of the job. The employee is engaged to wait.
|
Probably not the same article, but this DOL case is related to topic -sm - Karen
