Arizona sun., 1947-11-21


leaves unaffected what has been
known under the Fair Labor STAN
dards Act of 1888 (Federal wage
and hour law as the workday, or
period from whistle to whistle, and
what has been known as hours
worked within that period.
The Portal Act also differenti-
ates between an employees princi-
pal activities, and those performed
preliminary or postliminary to his
workday.
The Portal Act does not affect
an employers liability to pay an
employee for his principal activi-
ties, and relieves employers of
liability only as to those prelimi-
nary or postliminary activities out
side the workday for which pay
ment is not provided by contract,
custom or practice. The portal law
is of utmost Importance to thous-
ands of workers in Arizona.
These and other explanations of
how the Portal Act affects the
Fair Labor Standards Act are con-
tanned in an interpretative bulletin
just issued by William R. McComb,
Administrator of the Wage and
Hour and Public Contracts Divi-
sions, u. S. Department of Labor,
according to John R. Ollie, regional
director for the Divisions in the
eight Western States. Discussing
the Portal Act and the bulletin
today, Director Ollie said:
"The Portal Act was enacted on
May IA, 1947, by Congress to re-
lieve employers from certain Ii
abilities and punishments under
the FISA, and for other purposes.
Its provisions apply primarily to
employer liabilities to approximate
ly 100000 workers in interstate
commerce covered by the minimum
wage and maximum hours sections
of the FISA. At the time of the
Portal Acts adoption, some 1900
individuals and group employee
suits were on file throughout the
nation, claiming back wages esti-
mated at more than $6,000,00O,00O
under the Elsa. The Elsa sets a
legal minimum wage Of 40 cents
an hour and requires payment of
at least time and a half for all
hours worked over 40 per week.
"The Portal Act includes pro-
visions which deal broadly with ex-
listing and potential claims for back
wages covering the period before
its adoption by providing for the
outright dismissal of some en-
ployee suits and for compromise of
others. It also establishes a two
year limitation for the filing of
wage claims arising on and after
May IA, 1947 and, in some in
stances, limits claims covering the
period before that date to two
years or less. This Act specifically
guides it's application to the Elsa
for the period beginning May IA.
Administrator McComb's inter-
pretations of the Portal Acts ap-
plication to Elsa, therefore, is
concerned chiefly with the period
beginning May ii. The Administra-
tor explains in the bulletin, how
ever, that the correctness of an in
depreciation of the Portal Acts
meaning can be determined finally
and authoritatively only by the
courts. Thus, the bulletin is in
tended to indicate, the construction
of the law which the Administra-
tor believes to be correct and which
will guide him in the performance
of his Administrative duties under
the Elsa, unless and until he is
directed otherwise by authoritative
rulings of the courts or he con-
cludes, upon re-examination of ar
Interpretation, that it is Incorrect
In considering what constitutes
principal" activities, Ollie pointed
out, the bulletin refers to several
guides suggested in the legislative
debates on the Portal Act. These
explain that while any work Of
consequence performed by an EN-.
ployee for an employer, no matter
when, must be included, it i.
necessary to give due regard tc
generally established pay practices
in the particular industry anc
trade concerned in each interpreta.
ton, he said.
The bulletin also holds, Ollie
said, that no one activity need