Protective Gear

News & Analysis as of

The Lack of Concussion-Specific Helmet Safety Standards Remains a Concern for School Districts and Student-Athletes

With the national spotlight increasingly focused on concussion management, protocols, and prevention, it is somewhat surprising that helmet safety has not comprised a larger role in the discussion....more

Reflective Apparel Seeks Declaratory Judgment That Safety Vest Does Not Reflect Competitor's Patent Claims

Reflective Apparel Factory, Inc. (“Reflective”), a Georgia corporation headquartered in Marietta, seeks a declaratory judgment against Carolina Safety Acquisition, LLC (“Carolina”), a Delaware limited liability company...more

The "Villain's" Reply: Judge Posner Defends His Experiment in Chambers

We last wrote about Mitchell v. JCG Industries, No. 13-2115 (7th Cir. Mar. 18, 2014), in mid-March, when one judge on the panel (all suspected Judge Posner) confirmed his “intuition” that plaintiffs in a donning-and-doffing...more

Donning/Doffing Personal Protective Items: What About Mealtime?

As we wrote in our January Labor Alert, the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Sandifer v. United States Steel Corp. interpreted the federal Fair Labor Standards Act's Section 3(o) to apply to putting on and taking off a variety...more

Seventh Circuit Gets (Maybe Too) Clever In FLSA Donning And Doffing Case (Part 1 Of 2)

A few weeks ago on Twitter, I remarked on Mitchell v. JCG Industries, a case from the Seventh Circuit penned by Judge Richard Posner: Worked OK for #employer here, but scary precedent for all if judges do own demos...more

Supreme Court Says No Need To Pay Union Employees For Certain Protective Gear Dressing If Bargaining Agreement Excludes It

In Sandifer v. U.S. Steel Corp., the U.S. Supreme Court held that the FLSA does not require unionized employers to compensate employees for time spent putting on and taking off certain protective clothing if they have a...more

Unionized Employers Take Note Of The Recent Supreme Court Ruling Under The FLSA

On January 27, 2014, a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court interpreted the meaning of the term “changing clothes” found in the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA or Act), specifically at 29 U.S.C. § 203(o). This case is significant for...more

Pay for Time Spent Donning and Doffing Protective Gear

The Supreme Court’s unanimous decision in Sandifer v. United States Steel Corp., No. 12-417 (January 27, 2014) should serve as an impetus for all employers to review their pay practices with respect to paying employees for...more

In Light of Supreme Court's Sandifer Decision, Employers Should Revisit "Donning and Doffing" Compensation Policies

On January 27, 2014, the United States Supreme Court held that time spent donning and doffing required protective gear was not compensable under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and the terms of a collective bargaining...more

Supreme Court’s Sandifer Decision Is Not Just About Changing Clothes

In Sandifer et al. v. United States Steel Corp., a unanimous Supreme Court clarified the meaning of "changing clothes" found in Section 203(o) of the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA" or "Act"), holding that "changing clothes"...more

Get Dressed! But Don’t Expect The Company to Pay for It!

Sandifer v. United States Steel Corporation, U.S. Supreme Court No. 12-417, decided January 27, 2014 (appeal from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit), is one of the rarer instances in which the Supreme Court...more

U.S. Supreme Court Clarifies Meaning of Compensable Donning and Doffing

On January 27, 2014, the United States Supreme Court clarified the meaning of “changing clothes” under the Fair Labor Standards Act’s (“FLSA”) donning and doffing protections....more

Employment Law - Feb 06, 2014

The More Things Change: U.S. Supreme Court Rules on “Changing Clothes” - Why it matters: In a unanimous decision – save for a single footnote – the U.S. Supreme Court held that the time spent donning and doffing...more

U.S. Supreme Court Takes The Wind Out Of Donning And Doffing Class Actions

For years, plaintiffs’ lawyers have brought class actions against employers seeking compensation for time spent by employees putting on and taking off protective gear. The numbers have been staggering, as eight figure...more

The Supreme Court’s Sandifer Decision and Collective Actions

Last week, the Supreme Court decided the case of Sandifer v. United States Steel Corp., Case No. 12-417 (Jan. 27, 2014), addressing donning and doffing claims in the context of a unionized steel mill. That case not only...more

Wage And Hour Issues Make Headlines Early In 2014

Based upon a unanimous ruling from the United States Supreme Court and comments from President Barack Obama during his State of the Union address, wage and hour issues are front and center for 2014. Under the wage and hour...more

Justices Scoff at Payment for Don and Doff

Employees who spend time putting on and taking off protective clothes, including flame-retardant outerwear, gloves, boot and hardhats, do not have to be paid for that time when it occurs before and after the work day, the...more

Is Putting on and Taking off Protective Gear Compensable? Supreme Court (Ad)dresses that Issue in Latest Ruling

This week the Supreme Court held that time unionized workers spend putting on (donning) and taking off (doffing) personal protective gear is not compensable under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The decision comes on the heels...more

The Latest from the U.S. Supreme Court - Time Spent Putting On and Taking Off Protective Gear Is Not Compensable Under the Fair...

Earlier this week, in Sandifer v. U.S. Steel Corp., the Supreme Court addressed whether unionized workers may be entitled to compensation for time spent putting on and taking off protective gear. The Court found that putting...more

Do Employers Have To Pay Unionized Workers For Time Spent Donning And Doffing Safety Gear? Supreme Court Says No

In recent years, one of the hottest types of collective actions against employers under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) is what is commonly called a “donning and doffing claim”—a lawsuit for unpaid wages for time...more

Supreme Court Rules That "Donning And Doffing" Protective Gear Subject To Collective Bargaining; Leaves Door Open For Future...

On Monday, January 27, 2014, the United States Supreme Court unanimously ruled that a group of unionized steel workers at U.S. Steel Corporation did not need to be compensated for the time they spent "donning and doffing"...more

Restaurant Industry Newsletter - July 2013

When OSHA Comes to Dine It Doesn't Make Reservations - The Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) establishes and enforces workplace safety regulations in several industries, including restaurants....more

Supreme Court Watch: Employment Cases in 2013

The 2013 U.S. Supreme Court term features several employment law cases important to employers and human resource professionals, including the following significant pending cases...more

Ohio Supreme Court Offers Clarification of Employment Intentional Tort Statute

In a decision favorable to Ohio employers, the Ohio Supreme Court recently clarified the circumstances under which an employer can be found to have committed an “employment intentional tort.” The Court’s decision, in Hewitt...more

Under FLSA Section 203(o) Does the Term "Changing Clothes" Include the Time a Manufacturing Employee Spends Putting On and Taking...

For minimum wage and over-time purposes, Section 203(o) of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) states that "hours worked" does not include time spent "changing clothes" if that time is excluded from working time by the...more

28 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 2