Facts of the Case
Jim Skidmore and other employees of the Swift & Company packing plant in Fort Worth, Texas were all firemen, elevator operators, or relief firemen who worked eight hours per week, for which they were paid normally. They also spent three-and-a-half to four nights per week in the fire hall, where they were on-call in case of an alarm; however, they were only paid for time spent actually responding to an alarm. The fire hall was equipped with heated and air-conditioned sleeping quarters, along with the equipment for various recreational activities, such as pool, dominoes, etc. The plaintiffs could sleep or be otherwise engaged during the time they spent in the fire hall as long as they were available should there be an alarm. The plaintiffs sued Swift & Company under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and argued that they should be compensated for the time spent in the fire hall even when not directly answering an alarm. They sought to recover around $77,000 in overtime costs, liquidated damages and attorneys’ fees. The trial court found that the time spent in the fire hall did not constitute work under the FLSA, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed.
Questions
Does the time the plaintiffs spent in the fire hall constitute work under the Fair Labor Standards Act?
Conclusions
-
Yes. Justice Robert H. Jackson delivered the case for the unanimous Court. The Court held that there was no reason that time spent waiting could not also be time spent working, especially in cases in which the conditions of employment involve waiting time. Although it can be difficult to determine the facts of a case and whether the activity in question constitutes work, Congress granted the courts the authority to do so. In this case, the Court held that the decisions in the lower courts were based on an erroneous understanding of the law that classified waiting time as wholly separate from working time, so the judgment was reversed and the case remanded.
Should a Labor Court Replace the Adjudication Function of the NLRB?
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has come under increasing criticism, with some accusing it...
The FCC Still Can’t Interpret Section 230
In the waning days of the first Trump Administration, Tom Johnson, then-General Counsel of the...
Panel I: How We Got Here – The Supreme Court’s “Anti-Administrativist” Turn?
2025 National Student Symposium
Featuring: Prof. Jeffrey Pojanowski, Biolchini Family Professor of Law, Notre Dame Law School Prof. Jennifer...
Regulatory Ferment at DOL and the NLRB
In a time of rapidly shifting administrative law norms, the Department of Labor and NLRB...
Unleashing American Energy at CEQ
On his first day back in office, President Trump issued Executive Order 14154 (Unleashing American...
What Does "New" Mean? Agency Action Post-Chevron
Last term, the Supreme Court handed down its ruling in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo. ...
The Curtain Falls on Chevron: Will the Chevron Two-Step Give Way to a Simpler Loper Bright-Line Rule?
Federalist Society Review, Volume 25
Traditionally, administrative law cases don’t make news. Instead, they make snooze. They can be exciting...
West Virginia v. EPA, Two Years Later: Updates on the Major Questions Doctrine
Experts will examine the major questions doctrine, its role in regulatory litigation, and its place...
After Chevron, a New Birth of Deference for the Administrative State?
For decades, the judicial doctrine called “Chevron deference” dominated American administrative law. In the aftermath...
What’s Happening with Apprenticeship? – Recent Regulatory and Subregulatory Actions
Apprenticeship has been a significant focus of the Biden administration, and previously the Trump administration,...
Courthouse Steps Decision: Loper Bright & Relentless
Chevron v. NRDC (1984) and subsequent precedents held that courts should defer to agency interpretations...
A Seat at the Sitting - February 2024
The February Docket in 90 Minutes or Less
Each month, a panel of constitutional experts convenes to discuss the Court’s upcoming docket sitting...
Loper and Labor Law: Implications of a Possible Decrease in Deference on New Rulemaking
On January 18, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and...
Courthouse Steps Oral Argument: Loper Bright & Relentless
In two cases this term (Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and Relentless Inc. v. Department of...
Chevron Under Review: Courthouse Steps Preview: Loper Bright & Relentless
Chevron v. NRDC (1984) and subsequent precedents held that courts should defer to agency interpretations...
The Administrative State, Its Supporters and Its Discontents
2023 National Lawyers Convention
The administrative state - the agencies comprising the Executive Branch of the U.S. federal government...
Loper Bright and the Next Steps for Chevron Deference at the Supreme Court
This Term, the Supreme Court will hear Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo—a case concerning judicial...
City Hall and Chevron: Administrative Deference at the Local Government Level
Most of the public debate about administrative deference has been focused on federal agencies and...
Ohio Supreme Court Holds That the Courts, Not State Agencies, “Say What the Law Is.”
In a recent opinion by Justice Patrick DeWine, the Ohio Supreme Court unanimously reaffirmed that...
In the Shadow of Skidmore and Seminole Rock?: Chevron and Auer Deference and Their Conceits
When an agency interprets a statute it administers, a court will defer to the agency’s...
Courthouse Steps Decision Webinar: Holly Frontier Cheyenne Refining LLC v. Renewable Fuels Association
On June 25, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Holly Frontier Cheyenne Refining LLC. v....
State Court Docket Watch: Myers v. Yamato Kogyo Co.
State Court Docket Watch: 2020 Edition
When should courts defer to an agency’s interpretation of a statute? At the federal level,...
The End of Deference: How States Are Leading a (Sometimes Quiet) Revolution Against Administrative Deference Doctrines
Federalism and Separation of Powers Teleforum
In the last few years there has been a lot of critical attention directed towards Chevron and Seminole...
The Dubious Morality of Modern Administrative Law
California-Berkeley Student Chapter
Event Audio: The Dubious Morality of Modern Administrative Law
Whistling in Chevronland: Why Department of Labor Interpretations of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act Whistleblower Provisions Do Not Deserve Judicial Deference
Federalist Society Review, Volume 20
Note from the Editor: The Federalist Society takes no positions on particular legal and public...
Deference Doctrines and the Clean Water Act
Environmental Law & Property Rights Practice Group, Administrative Law & Regulation Practice Group, and Regulatory Transparency Project
Recently, Justices of the Supreme Court have called the Court’s deference jurisprudence into significant question....
Gloucester County School Board v. G.G.: Judicial Overdeference Is Still a Massive Problem
Federalist Society Review, Volume 18
Note from the Editor: This article discusses Auer deference, a central issue in Gloucester County...
Chevron in the Circuit Courts - Podcast
Administrative Law and Regulation Practice Group Podcast
Recent opinions from the Supreme Court and policy debates within the halls of Washington have...
Chevron, The Nondelegation Doctrine, and Tobacco
Administrative Law Practice Group Newsletter - Volume 3, Issue 1, Spring 1999
Federalist Society members tend to applaud the Supreme Court's Chevron doctrine,1 because it seeks to...
