Document: 331 U.S. 199 67 S.Ct. 1178 91 L.Ed. 1432 149 MADISON AVE. CORPORATION et al.v.ASSELTA al. No. 497. Argued Feb. 11, 1947. Decided May 5, Judgment Modified June 16, See 795, 1726. Mr. Robert R. Bruce, of New York City, for petitioners. Wilbur Duberstein, respondents. Chief Justice VINSON delivered the opinion Court. 1 This employee suit was brought in District Court to recover overtime compensation, liquidated damages, and a reasonable attorney's fee pursuant §§ 7(a) 16(b) Fair Labor Standards Act 1938.1 Recovery allowed Court, 65 F.Supp. 385, that judgment affirmed Circuit Appeals, Cir., 156 F.2d 139. We granted certiorari consider important questions presented relating application provisions abovementioned statute. 2 Respondents are service maintenance employees who, during period question, worked loft building owned by petitioner Madison Avenue Corporation managed Williams & Co. It has been stipulated respondents were engaged production goods commerce.2 here concerned with employment extending from April, 21, 1942, December 10, 1943. 3 Prior April relations between petitioners governed collective wage agreement, known as Sloan Agreement.3 According its terms, paid flat weekly wages workweeks specified length which, case most respondents, amounted $25 47 hours employment. No hourly rates specified, nor any attempt made compensate at rate time one-half excess 40 week. 4 As expiration date Agreement drew near, negotiations interested parties initiated purpose reaching agreement on new contract. After preliminary conferences proved fruitless, certified War Board. That agency stated recommendations directive order issued July 29, 1942; September 1, entered into National Board Agreement. had agreed terms contract be retroactive 20, agreement. 5 The provided workweek 54 applicable watchmen 46 other regular employees. Weekly established or labor which sums include both payments 40. To derive wage, following formula included: 6 'The those regularly employed more than forty (40) per week shall determined dividing their earnings number plus actually hours.' 7 Although literal reading above language might seem indicate establishment variable dependent upon given week, such not practical construction parties. Instead making use worked, only scheduled work calculation non-overtime rate.4 derived remained constant, therefore, regardless whether greater lesser number. In effect, instead directly stating fixed amount hour whereby could calculated. 8 Under compensation varied according Thus, an unable all his due 'excusable cause,' he provision, however, six should compensated total less If employee's absence excusable, apparently sum obtained multiplying times rate, being credit exceeded 40.5 except one three-quarters 46. Watchmen twice 54. Part-time workers hired schedule workweek. 9 Congress enacting impose almost infinite variety situations single, rigid form Walling v. A. H. Belo Corp., 316 624, 62 1223, 86 1716. Section requires, falling within purview must establish 'regular rate' statutory minimum provide least rate.' A plan is nt rendered invalid simply because pay consistent requirements, have seen fit stipulate inclusive appropriate may therefrom. crucial this case, was, fact, meaning under consideration, adequate provision compensation. 10 held words rate,' while expressly defined statute, '* * mean normal, workweek.' Helmerich Payne, Inc., 1944, 323 37, 13, 89 29. thus 'actual fact,' testing validity courts required look beyond purported do. Youngerman-Reynolds Hardwood Co., 1945, 325 419, 424, 1242, 1244, 1705. contention pay; substantially payable working workweek; consequently, no until hours. believe record provides ample support view. 11 determining part-time whatsoever formula. despite fact that, formula, included pay. Insofar concerned, clearly indicated intention hour's payment pro-ratashare wage. 12 Nor there full Where absent worked. Rather, always treated resulting average considerably rate. 'overtime' raises strong doubt integrity basis Cf. supra. While received situation precisely would resulted 46, it ordinarily approached figure much closely did so-called formula.6 method reveals further evidence pro-rata share up 13 wcek rate.7 seems consistently applied situations, significant observe worker these circumstances approximates very 46.8 approximation fortuitous. origin discussed, statement made: 'Overtime over forty-six (46) effort approximately equal entitled, if computed half week.'9 14 Petitioners argued none conclusive demonstration actual said since they opportunity earn compensation; paying excusable absences merely laudable part fully requires when failed illness like causes; represented additional premium called exces n on-overtime cannot ignore face fails where expected control. These deviations take significance observed every situation, relatively unimportant exception involving unexcused absences,10 either straight 15 Further light thrown nature consideration operation. During 21 question subject negotiation, understood old remain effect but 20. obvious, above-mentioned dates repugnant requirements § Act. urge, illegality eliminated. But attempting satisfy liability, completely ignored each $2.50 period, representing increase without adjustment. admit 'Undoubtedly some who certain weeks overpaid; then prevailing enough.' apparent performed sense formula.11 16 our attention asserted, question. do feel necessary review matters length. sufficient state after considering operation practice, we come conclusion calling effective completed 'hourly supra, Halliburton Oil Well Cementing 1947, 17, 1056. Unlike cases guaranteed stipulation properly regrded th e 17 hold reasons Appeals requirements. supra; Harnischfeger 427, 1246, 1711. 18 Affirmed. 52 Stat. 1060, 29 U.S.C. 201 seq., U.S.C.A. seq. pertinent, provides: 'No employer shall, otherwise section, employ commerce commerce— '(3) longer second year date, unless receives employed.' part: 'Any violates section liable affected unpaid wages, be, damages. *' raised objection recovery assumed lower correctly liability. negotiated Realty Advisory Relations, Incorporated, agent various owners loft, office apartment buildings located Borough Manhattan City York, Local 32—B Building Service Employees International Union behalf members. same $27.50, means calculation: $27.50 (46 1/2(46 40))=$.561 hour. obtained, 49, divisor watchman (54 1/2(54—40))=$.4508 specific absences. above-described procedure however. Thus Anderson 39 14, 1943, cause.' entitle him pay, receivd c ompensation $23.56. accordingly $.604. workweek, $.598, whereas, $.561 So also, Peterson Dec. causes. payroll records reveal earned $18.50 $.617 compared $.561, watchmen, assigned hours, 50 $31.43 accordance If, instead, receive $31.09 work. watchman, 58 $31.11 calculated $30.55 (Emphasis supplied.) also contained provision: 'Per diem arrived normal days question.' obviously odds There nothing record, applied. Petitioner explains presence inadvertent hold-over earlier note somewhat similar prevailed respect $1.40 grantee October appears make adjustments conceded,

Category: 6