Production workers’ donning and doffing activities not compensable in light of CBA custom or practice
Donning and doffing wage claims asserted by production workers of a freight-car manufacturer were dismissed to the extent that they were non-compensable pursuant to a long-standing custom or practice under a bona fide collective bargaining agreement (“CBA”) under FLSA § 3(o). Nevertheless, the federal district court concluded that it was possible that the employees’ donning and doffing of required personal protective equipment (“PPE”) was necessary to the performance of their duties, and primarily benefited the employer, such that this activity was integral and indispensable and defined the outer parameter of the workday. Consequently, the court declined to rule as a matter of law that donning and doffing of PPE could never mark the start or end of the employees’ continuous workday. Under FLSA, the court stated, employers must pay employees for time spent donning and doffing “integral and indispensable” safety gear, except that FLSA allows unions and employers to vary this rule via custom and practice under a CBA.
Notwithstanding the court’s conclusion that the employees’ donning and doffing of PPE was excluded under § 3(o), the court rejected the employer’s contention that donning and doffing of PPE, as a matter of law, cannot constitute “principal activity” that starts the compensable work day. Rather, the court declined to hold that once an activity is deemed non-compensable under FLSA § 3(o), it can never be considered a principal activity under the FLSA. Thus, in denying the employer’s motion for summary judgment, the court rejected the employer’s argument that exclusion of time under § 3(o) automatically disqualifies those activities from being considered integral and indispensable to the employees’ principal activities on behalf of the employer.
(Marshall v. Amsted Rail Co, Inc., Case No. 10-cv-0011-MJR-SCW (N.D. Ill. Sept. 20, 2011)).