Court Opinion

ID: 9445892
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 21:40:21.481784+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:30:26.531698
License: Public Domain

RIVES, Circuit Judge
(dissenting).
If the employees were engaged in work having any economic significance, it was in the production of goods for commerce. The ascertainment of their wages could not await the ultimate success or failure of the project but depended upon the work in which they were currently engaged. Nor do I think that an employer who undertakes to produce goods for commerce can defeat his employees’ claims under the Act by an alleged defense that because, by afterthought, the conduct of the employer himself appears to have been foolish or reckless, it can now be seen that the employees were really engaged in no useful work. If an employer has thus abused the dignity of labor, he cannot visit the consequences upon his employees.
I therefore respectfully dissent.