Evening star., 1947-02-09

closing hour. Some punched out ex-
actly at the closing hour after walk
ing to the time clock before quitting
time and waiting until the even
hour. The only cleaning up that
plaintiffs did was policing around
their particular job on company
time. This was also in conformity
with the findings of the matter.
Sum Total Would Reach Less
Than Three Minutes.
While we do not consider A, B, c.,
| D, G, H, or K above as prelmi-
nary activities, nevertheless If the
Supreme Courts opinion means
what plaintiffs contend, to wit, that
they are, the sum total for any one
person would less than three
minutes a day.
From the testimony this court has
arrived at the conclusion that in
only three departments, the glost
belt, where gloves and hand rags
were put on, the slip house where
clothes were changed, and in the
dipping and brushing department
where finger cots were used, were
there any preliminary activities that
we could consider in any way not
part of the job, and necessarily per-
formed before the employe started
to work; and that in the glost and
dipping departments those prelimi-
| nary activities would not take two
minutes day, adding walking
time" and preliminary activities"
While perhaps the following
should properly be under "conclu-
sions of law" for convenience we
place this finding and statement
here.
There was much urging that the
court should pass separately upon
the "de minima" features of pre-
liminary activities, and walking
time. And there is some reasoning
to support this since the Supreme
Court referring to preliminary activ-
tiles and the de minimis doctrine
used the significant words here
again." indicating the two, walking
time"' and preliminary activities" I"
were to be considered separately.
Still we reject this theory.
We believe that if time is used in
walking, and any time in prelimi-
nary activities either before or fol-
lowing the walking. that they should
be considered together. Even if
standing apart they would be de
mininis. -
AS we interpret the instructions
lof the Supreme Court, however, it
makes no difference in this case.
Conclusions of Law:
"De Minimis Nom"
Much has been written In briefs
submitted about "de minimis non"
one laying foundation for discus
sion by treating the subject his
torically. But for the most part
counsel devoted their efforts advo-
eating legal principles on which
there is no disagreement and very
often the expounder lost sight of the
fact that here we are bound by the
masters report. The question here
is not whether the employees were
compelled to be on the premises IA
minutes before starting or after
quitting time. The Supreme Court
has already upheld findings of the
master that they were not. But
most of the cases cited are along
these lines and not at all in point
Decisions on the vital issue "de
minimis' leave something to be de-
sired and we submit that the only
real aid lies in those cases, bulletins,
ETC.. which treat of the application
of de minimis non to Sec. 7 tA) OF
the Fair Labor Standards Act; not
in law suits involving three or four
cents, nor what percentage of inter-
state commerce is necessary to place
some firm under the act.
However, we do find in the Wage
and Hour Manual 1944-1945, page
234, in answering a query as to how
a certain employer was to compute
work time for his employe who
spent Is to Is minutes each day
going between the job and the time
clock, the Chicago regional attorney
held that if the employers records
of hours actually worked by the
employe were kept in good faith,
any disparity between those records
and time clock records might be
accounted for by these factors, and
the payroll records would be given
weight in determining the hours
worked. Here, though not exactly
in point, is an indication of de
minimis non since part at least if
not all of that IS or Is minutes
had to be used in walking.
In Vol. S, Wage and Hour Re-
porter at page 148, answering an
inquiry, the Public Contracts Ad-
ministrator said:
"As to recorded time, the depart
ment makes allowances for reason
able period of time to cover the
period between the time an employe
ceases work and the time he punches
out on his card. However, period
in excess of Is minutes is regarded
as unreasonable"
This, of course, indicates Is min
utes only after work and presum-
ably % minutes for coming and
going was de mininis.
In Walling VS.. Peavy- Wilson Lum-
ber Co., 49 F. Supp. 846, at pages
883 and 1856, the log sawyers walked
a distance from practically nothing
Used Hearing Aids asKt AMY