join our network! affiliate login  
Custom Search
GET OUR FREE EMAIL NEWSLETTERS!
Daily and Weekly Editions • Articles • Alerts • Expert Advice • Learn More
McDonald v. Kellogg Co. (D. Kansas 2010)

Articles Discussing Case:

Compensability of Time Spent Donning and Doffing and Pre and Post-Shift Activities Continues to Divide the Courts

Franczek Radelet P.C • October 08, 2010
The question often arises whether the time spent “donning and doffing” clothes and personal protective equipment is compensable time. Federal courts are divided over this issue. In particular, the courts disagree about the meaning of “clothes” as used in Section 203(o) of the Fair Labor Standards Act. Under this Section, certain employees do not have to be compensated for changing their “clothes.” Courts interpret the meaning of clothes differently. While some courts have held that it includes both uniforms and personal protective equipment, other courts have held that personal protective equipment is not included. The Supreme Court has not addressed the issue, and recently refused to review a lower court’s ruling that personal protective equipment is included within Section 203(o). Sepulveda v. Allen Family Foods Inc. While the Supreme Court declined to find a split in the Appellate Courts, the reality remains that federal courts interpret the scope of the exclusion under Section 203(o) differently.