Legal Document

350 U.S. 260 76 Supreme Court Reporter 337 100 L.Ed. 282 James Pacific KF135 P2 MITCHELL, Secretary of Labor, United States Department Petitioner,v.KING PACKING COMPANY. Number 39. Argued Nov. 16, 17, 1955. Decided Jan. 30, 1956. Bessie Margolin, Washington, D.C., for petitioners. Mr. Willard S. Johnston, San Francisco, Cal., respondent. Chief Justice WARREN delivered the opinion Court. 1 This case like Steiner versus Mitchell, 247, 330, raises an issue coverage under Fair Labor Standards Act, as amended by Portal-to-Portal Act 1947, 29 Code Annotated KF65 U5 § 201 et seq., with respect to work performed before or after direct productive labor which worker is primarily paid. 2 The District denied injunction enforce compliance and Appeals Ninth Circuit affirmed. 216 Federal Reporter, 2nd Series 618. 3 court below recognized a conflict Steiner,1 and, although holding that Section 4 controls situation here, determined, contrary in case, 'the terms 'preliminary' 'postliminary' cannot be interpreted so exclude (from exemptions from Act) all activity 'indispensable performance work.' To do would deny effect intended meaning Act.'2 We granted certiorari resolve this conflict. 349 914, 75 605, 99 1248. In Steiner, reasons therein set forth, we concluded enforcement date activities either regular shift, on off production line, are compensable portal-to-portal provisions if those integral indispensable part principal covered workmen employed not specifically excluded 4(a)(1). 5 only question determined whether knife-sharpening employees respondent King Packing company within classification. 6 Respondent interstate meat packer engaged slaughtering, butchering, dressing distributing products. It employs at its packing plant about persons, whom one-third knifemen, whose compensation rights involved litigation. knifemen perform various butchering operations, 12 14 them working killing room others cutting room. Various knives three types electric saws used operations. Some furnished their employment. These boning, shaving, legging skinning siding knives. more expensive loin pulling, ham skinning, shoulder trimming sparerib All well must 'razor sharp' proper work. Respondent's manager one testified dull knife slow down conducted assembly line basis, affect appearance quality hides, cause waste make accidents; 'that any practical value job has * sharp.' 7 Though entire cost keeping condition borne respondent, required sharpen own outside scheduled shift eight hours, they compensated. sharpening these done during lunch hour equipped emery wheel grindstone. A knifeman ordinarily sharpens two four day. At time man hired for, promoted to, job, it understood he will He expected task other tasks connected job. 8 paid excluding controversy, hours day, five days week. 9 believe facts clearly demonstrate were principally employed, compensated construed us today Mitchell.3 Because decision below, resting solely upon erroneous reading 4, accordance our construction, judgment reversed remanded proceedings inconsistent herewith. 10 Reversed remanded. 'The argues but rather 'an activity', since employees' relies statement Senator Cooper, sponsors made Senate debate bill term 'principal activities' 'sufficiently broad embrace such Cir., 1954, 215 171, supports contention.' page 621. discussion between Cooper Barkley, quoted appendix 256, 335, particularly apposite instant case.

Classification Label: 6