Sandifer v. United States Steel Corporation Page 2

Sandifer v. United States Steel Corporation general information

Media for Sandifer v. United States Steel Corporation

Audio Transcription for Oral Argument - November 04, 2013 in Sandifer v. United States Steel Corporation

Audio Transcription for Opinion Announcement - January 27, 2014 in Sandifer v. United States Steel Corporation

The few minutes or even seconds spent putting on and taking off gloves or headgear for example.

There is no more reason to disregard the brief time devoted to donning and doffing one of the last three items here than there is to regard the brief time devoted to donning and doffing one of the other nine.

The proper approach we hold is to ask whether the period at issue on the hold can be fairly characterized as time spent in changing clothes or washing.

So if an employee devotes the vast majority of that time to putting on and off clothes, the entire period qualifies.

But he devotes it to putting on and off non-clothes items, it does not.

We accept the District Court's factual determinations that the time spent donning and doffing two of the three nine clothes items here was negligible, and that the time devoted to the final item does not occur at the beginning or end of the work day, but -- but rather occurs when the worker reports to his work station and thus falls outside the scope of the statute.

We therefore conclude that the donning and doffing of protective gear in this case counts as changing clothes and is non-compensable by operation of Section 203(o).

The judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit is affirmed.

The Court's decision is unanimous except that Justice Sotomayor does not join as to footnote seven.