Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Date: February 6, 2014
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comU.S. businesses started the October 2013 Supreme Court Term with a key victory for employers. Earlier this month, the justices unanimously ruled that U.S. Steel Corp. did not have to pay unionized employees for time spent changing in and out of protective gear under the terms of a collective bargaining agreement.
Under the Fair labor Standard Act (FLSA), the clock starts running on employee compensation when the worker engages in a “principal activity.” Accordingly, courts have held that workers must be compensated for the time they spend donning and doffing required uniforms and safety gear, unless it is de minimis.
However, the rules are different for unionized employees. Under section 203(o) of the FLSA, an employer is not required to compensate a worker for time spent “changing clothes” (even if it is a principal activity) if that time is expressly excluded from compensable time under a bona fide collective bargaining agreement.
The decision in Sandifer v. U.S. Steel Corp. resolves a circuit split regarding how to resolve the two provisions of the FLSA. The justices ultimately concluded that the majority of the protective gear at issue in the case fell under the definition of “clothes” in Section 203(o) and, therefore, the time was not compensable.
“Dictionaries from the era of [Section] 203(o)’s enactment indicate that ‘clothes’ denotes items that are both designed and used to cover the body and are commonly regarded as articles of dress,” Justice Antonin Scalia wrote. “[N]othing in the text or context of [Section] 203(o) suggests anything other than the ordinary meaning of ‘clothes.’ ”
Scalia further noted that there was “no basis for the proposition that the unmodified term ‘clothes’ somehow omits protective clothing.” With regard to safety gear such as glasses and earplugs, Scalia conceded that they were not typically viewed as clothes.
However, the justices concluded that a decision treating these types of protective items differently would create confusion for courts down the road. It is unlikely that Congress intended to “convert federal judges into time-study professionals,” Scalia wrote.
If you have any questions about this case or would like to discuss how it may impact your company’s wage and hour policies, please contact me, Christine Vanek, or the Scarinci Hollenbeck attorney with whom you work.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.

Non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) remain a critical tool for protecting sensitive business information. However, New York NDA requirements have evolved, and businesses must ensure these agreements are carefully drafted to remain enforceable. In a competitive market like New York City, NDAs are commonly used to protect proprietary information, client relationships, and strategic plans. At the same […]
Author: Dan Brecher

How Courts Evaluate Testamentary Capacity and Undue Influence Will contests in New Jersey are difficult to win, given the strong presumption that a properly executed will reflects the testator’s intent. However, challenges based on lack of testamentary capacity and undue influence remain common, particularly where there are concerns about mental capacity or the involvement of […]
Author: Marc J. Comer

Bringing on outside investors can provide the capital and strategic support a business needs to grow. However, raising capital also introduces important legal, financial, and operational considerations. Before bringing on investors, businesses should address key legal issues to reduce risk, streamline investor due diligence, and position the company for long-term success. Early preparation signals that […]
Author: Dan Brecher

How the Updated Law Shapes Retirement and Estate Planning The SECURE 2.0 Act of 2022 materially reshapes the required minimum distribution (RMD) landscape, extending tax deferral opportunities while accelerating distribution requirements for many beneficiaries. For high-net-worth individuals and families, these changes are not merely technical. They require a reassessment of retirement income strategies, beneficiary planning, […]
Author: Marc J. Comer

Small businesses considering buying commercial property in New Jersey must evaluate a range of legal, financial, and operational factors. While ownership can offer long-term value and control, it also introduces significant risks if not properly structured. This guide outlines key considerations to help New Jersey business owners make informed decisions, minimize legal exposure, and successfully […]
Author: Robert L. Baker, Jr.

On January 28, 2026, staff of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s Divisions of Corporation Finance, Investment Management, and Trading and Markets issued a joint statement clarifying how existing federal securities laws apply to tokenized securities. The SEC’s “Statement on Tokenized Securities” does not establish new law, but it does provide greater clarity on the […]
Author: Dan Brecher
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!