The Waterbury Democrat., 1942-06-12

! S@aSAOAA1 On June l, which was supposed to have been the final decision day of the term, the Supreme Court handed down its opinion in the so- called Kirschbaum case. The effect of the decision was to classify as employed in interstate commerce, and therefore eligible for wage-hour law minimum benefits, all mainte- nance men like janitors, watchmen, elevator operators, building engi- neers and messengers. The general principle established is that an em- ployer doesn't have to have physi- cal contact with the goods going into interstate commerce in order to be subject to the laws provisions. For instance, a building owner ; whose tenants are engaged in in- terstate commerce is considered to be in interstate commerce himself. COMES CONSERVATION
 The Kirschbaum decisions impli- cations are even greater:
 Local utilities selling gas or pow CT to manufacturer of goods go- ing into interstate commerce would also be included, even though none of the electric power or gas sold by the utility went out of the state. Employees hired by advertising agencies would be covered if the goods advertised not necessarily the ads themselves crossed state line.
 And so on.
 Those are just a few of the req sons for all the consternation which this Kirschbaum case deci- sion has thrown into the ranks of employers who had previously con- sidered themselves immune from the minimum wave, overtime, and 40-hour week provisions of the wage-hour law, now tremendously broadened in its application. So broadened, in fact, that the only employers really exempted were op- orators of service establishments" like barber shops, cleaning and dye ing establishments or restaurants. All this was on June 1. But the Supreme Court had two more wage and hour cases up its voluminous black sleeve and so, to clear the docket, it stayed in session another week, to June 8, doing overtime without extra compensation itself to hand down opinions in what will probably be known for short as the Overnight and Belo cases.
 ] In the Overnight Motor Trans YNorto finv1 TNOy1osooYv 0asa kho court held that the wage-hour law pro- vides for compulsory payment of time -and a half for overtime, whether the employe is making well above the minimum wage set by the law, or not. The Overnight company contended that compul- Sory time-and-a- half need not be paid for overtime if the employees regular pay amounted to as much as or more than the minimum 40 cents an hour for 40 hours plus 60 cents for the overtime. Thus, if a mans regular wage were $40 a week, he wouldn't have to be paid overtime If he worked a 50-hour week, because 40 hours at 40 cents plus 10 hours at 60 cents adds up to only $22. But the court said in effect, no, the ran should be paid $40 for his first 40 hours, plus over time for 10 hours at the rate of $1.5O an hour, or $15. This is the way overtime has usually been computed, so there was no great surprise or shock in that.
 COMES CONFUSION
 But along comes the case of the A. H. Belo Corporation, publishers of the Dallas, Tex, News. The Belo corporation had taken the trouble to work out contract with its em- ployes to do practically the same thing the Overnight company tried to do, without contract. Under the Belo contract the employees were guaranteed certain minimum sal- ary, in excess of the minimuns of wage -hour law. For every hour the employe worked, he was credited with one-sixtieth of his base pay. The one -sixtieh part was purely op- tionaI and the fraction could have been one-fiftieth or one-hundredth or anything. Anyway, if the em- ploye worked only 40 hours, he still got his minimum base pay. Say 1t was $50 a week. But if he worked 50 hours or 60 hours, he still got only $50, and his overtime didn't begin till he had worked more than 60 hours.
 -felI, in the Belo decision. the Supreme Court ruled this practice okay. And if you can reconcile that opinion with the Overnight opinion. you belcNg on the Supreme Court yourself.
 In the Kirschbaum and Over night decisions, the court had set wage-hour administration up on a firm foundation. In the Belo de- cision, the question is whether the foundation has been knocked from under the wage-hour law.