Skidmore v. Swift & Co.
Headline: Ruling lets on-call overnight fire-hall time potentially count as working time under federal wage law, reversing lower courts and sending the case back for factual findings about overtime pay.
Holding: In a reversal, the Court ruled that time spent on-call at the employer’s fire hall can be treated as working time under the Fair Labor Standards Act and sent the case back for factual findings on overtime.
- Permits on-call waiting time to be counted as paid work in overtime calculations.
- Requires courts to examine agreements and facts to decide if waiting is work.
- Could expose employers to back pay for unpaid on-call hours.
Summary
Background
Seven men who worked at a meatpacking plant in Fort Worth had regular daytime jobs and also agreed to stay in the company’s fire hall three and a half to four nights a week. They received a weekly salary and small extra payments only when they answered alarms. While on duty at night they could sleep, play games, and use provided facilities, but had to remain in or near the fire hall and be ready to respond. The trial court and the Court of Appeals held that this on-call time was not hours worked under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Reasoning
The Court held that waiting or on-call time can, depending on the facts, be working time under the wage law; there is no blanket rule excluding such time. Whether a particular period counts as work is a factual question for the trial court to decide by looking at the parties’ agreement, how they actually behaved, the nature of the service, and surrounding circumstances. The Court said the Labor Department’s interpretive guidance is useful and deserves respect, but is not controlling. Because the lower courts rested on a mistaken legal rule that waiting time cannot be work, the Court reversed and sent the case back for proper factual findings.
Real world impact
Employers and workers with on-call arrangements must have courts examine the concrete facts to see if waiting time is compensable. The ruling may lead to new findings of unpaid overtime in similar situations, but this decision is not a final award — it requires further proceedings in the lower court to determine what hours, if any, are work.
Ask about this case
Ask questions about the entire case, including all opinions (majority, concurrences, dissents).
What was the Court's main decision and reasoning?
How did the dissenting opinions differ from the majority?
What are the practical implications of this ruling?