Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/boundvolumes/529bv.pdf
Page Number: 667

529US2

Unit: $U53

[09-26-01 10:37:28] PAGES PGT: OPIN

592

CHRISTENSEN v. HARRIS COUNTY

Stevens, J., dissenting

Justice Stevens, with whom Justice Ginsburg and

Justice Breyer join, dissenting.

Because the disagreement between the parties concerns
the scope of an exception to a general rule, it is appropriate
to begin with a correct identiﬁcation of the relevant general
rule. That rule gives all employees protected by the Fair
Labor Standards Act of 1938 a statutory right to compensa-
tion for overtime work payable in cash, whether they work
in the private sector of the economy or the public sector. 29
U. S. C. §§ 206, 207 (1994 ed. and Supp. III).
In 1985, Con-
gress enacted an exception to that general rule that permits
States and their political subdivisions to use compensatory
time instead of cash as compensation for overtime. The ex-
ception, however, is not applicable unless the public employer
ﬁrst arrives at an agreement with its employees to substi-
tute that type of compensation for cash. § 207(o); 29 CFR
§ 553.23 (1999). As I read the statute, the employer has no
right to impose compensatory overtime payment upon its
employees except in accordance with the terms of the agree-
ment authorizing its use.

The Court stumbles because it treats § 207’s limited and
conditional exception as though it were the relevant general
rule. The Court begins its opinion by correctly asserting
that public employers may “compensate their employees for
overtime by granting them compensatory time or ‘comp
time,’ which entitles them to take time off work with full
pay.” Ante, at 578.
It is not until it reaches the bottom of
the second page, however, that the Court acknowledges that
what appeared to be the relevant general rule is really an
exception from the employees’ basic right to be paid in cash.
Ante, at 579.

In my judgment, the fact that no employer may lawfully
make any use of “comp time” without a prior agreement with
the affected employees is of critical importance in answering
the question whether a particular method of using that form