Evening star., 1947-02-09
Portal Puy
Continued From First Page. J

are not entitled to any portal time
except when they are going to their
jobs. This time in the Mt. Clemens
case. his opinion continued, never
amounted to more than eight min
utes and he held this amount "de
minimis," or too trifling to merit
damages.
All Suits Not Nullified.
Judge Picard suggested further
more than any portal time under
40 to 25" minutes is customarily
considered trifling in industry and
should not require compensation.
He added:
Let us not be understood as
holding that all portal-to-portal
suits should be dismissed. There
may be, and perhaps are, many in
stances where walking and the pre-
liminary activity time consumed Is
of such an amount as to call for
compensation that the worker Is
not now receiving. But this is not
one"
The court gave as examples uni
formed plant policemen who might
be required to stand inspection be-
fore beginning work.
The opinion rendered today was
much more far-reaching that Judge
Picard's previous ruling in the
Mt. Clemens case.
Master Overruled Compensation.
The pottery workers sued for
overtime in 1941. A master in chan
Gerry, Donald F. Quaife, appointed
by Judge Picard, found that the
employees were not entitled to any
compensation.
Judge Picard in 1943 overruled
the master and awarded the en-
ployes nominal damages for over
time. In so doing, he discounted all
portal time.
The United States Circuit Court
of Appeals in Cincinnati reversed
Judge Picard and held with the
master that the employees were not
entitled to overtime.
The Supreme Court held similarly
but added that Judge Picard must
consider the portal time in comput-
ing overtime They sent the case
back to him last June with instruc-
tiens to compute the portal time,
if any, and to assess it as "de mini
mis-" or otherwise lin the light of
the realities of the industrial world"
Today's 29-page opinion followed
public hearings in which the ma
tional CIO fought for portal pay
while the United States Government
and the National Association OF
Manufacturers opposed it.
Little to Guide Industry.
Judge Picard held that industry,
attempting to abide by the Fair
Labor Standards Act of 1888 in re-
gard to overtime, had little to guide
them except administrative bulle-
tins and vague court decisions, not
necessarily directly related to their
own industry.
Therefore, he reasoned, it was not
until the Supreme Court enunciated
the portal theory in the Mt.
Clemens case last June that in
dustry could be expected to be liable
for portal time.
Judge Picard said that actually
the portal-to-portal theory, while
enunciated by the high court, was
injected into the Mount Clemens
case because "the defendant COM
pany oversold its defense before the
master 4 years ago in explaining
why its employees reported IA min
utes before starting hours"
This was quickly taken advantage
of by plaintiffs in the interim be-
tween the court of appeals and the
Supreme Court" he continued.
The court held that walking time
and make-ready time should be
added together to make portal time
and that the de minimis rule ap-
piled to this total rather than to
the two separate figures.
No Difference i'm This Case.
"As we interpret the instructions
of the Supreme Court, however, it
makes no difference in this case" !"
the opinion continued.
Judge Picard said that in only
three departments of the Mount