Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/14pdf/13-433_5h26.pdf
Page Number: 11

Cite as:  574 U. S. ____ (2014) 

9 

Opinion of the Court 

the  Portal-to-Portal  Act  evinces  Congress’  intent  to  repu-
diate  Anderson’s  holding  that  such  walking  time  was
compensable under the FLSA.”  IBP, supra, at 41.  A test 
that turns on whether the activity is for the benefit of the 
employer is similarly overbroad. 

Finally,  we  reject  the  employees’  argument  that  time 
spent  waiting  to  undergo  the  security  screenings  is  com-
pensable under the FLSA because Integrity Staffing could 
have reduced that time to a de minimis amount.  The fact 
that an employer could conceivably reduce the time spent
by  employees  on  any  preliminary  or  postliminary  activity 
does  not  change  the  nature  of  the  activity  or  its  relation-
ship  to  the  principal  activities  that  an  employee  is  em-
ployed to perform.  These arguments are properly present-
ed to the employer at the bargaining table, see 29 U. S. C. 
§254(b)(1), not to a court in an FLSA claim. 

* 

* 

* 
We hold that an activity is integral and indispensable to
the  principal  activities  that  an  employee  is  employed  to 
perform—and  thus  compensable  under  the  FLSA—if  it  is 
an intrinsic element of those activities and one with which 
the employee cannot dispense if he is to perform his prin-
cipal  activities.  Because  the  employees’  time  spent  wait-
ing to undergo and undergoing Integrity Staffing’s security
screenings  does  not  meet  these  criteria,  we  reverse  the
judgment of the Court of Appeals. 

It is so ordered.