Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/13pdf/12-417_9okb.pdf
Page Number: 3

Cite as:  571 U. S. ____ (2014) 

3 

Syllabus 

entire  period  would  not  qualify  as  “time  spent  in  changing  clothes” 
under  §203(o),  even  if  some  clothes  items  were  also  donned  and 
doffed.  But  if  the  vast  majority  of  the  time  is  spent  in  donning  and 
doffing “clothes” as defined here, the entire period qualifies, and the
time  spent  putting  on  and  off  other  items  need  not  be  subtracted. 
Here, the Seventh Circuit agreed with the District Court’s conclusion 
that the time spent donning and doffing safety glasses and earplugs 
was  minimal.    And  this  Court  is  disinclined  to  disturb  the  District 
Court’s additional factual finding, not addressed by the Seventh Cir-
cuit,  that  the  respirators  were  donned  and  doffed  as  needed  during 
the normal workday and thus fell beyond §203(o)’s scope.  Pp. 12–15. 

678 F. 3d 590, affirmed. 

SCALIA,  J.,  delivered  the  opinion  of  the  Court,  in  which  ROBERTS, 
C. J.,  and  KENNEDY,  THOMAS,  GINSBURG,  BREYER,  ALITO,  and  KAGAN,
 
JJ., joined, and in which SOTOMAYOR, J., joined except as to footnote 7.