We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 28

Dressing the part is not enough: 8th Circuit decides that changing into uniforms does not start the “continuous workday”
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • September 4 2013

Taking up a question the Supreme Court recently declined to consider, the Eighth Circuit on Friday addressed the types of activities that may start


DOL shows integrity in supporting employer on compensability of time spent in security screenings
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • June 10 2014

The Department of Labor surprised employers last week by weighing in on Integrity Staffing Solutions, Inc. v. Busk, which is currently pending before


Dress rehearsals are over: Supreme Court to hear arguments on Monday regarding compensability of changing clothes at work
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • November 1 2013

On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear argument in a case that will directly impact employers relying on 203(o) of the FLSA - a provision


If it looks like pants and it walks like pants Supreme Court considers definition of “clothes” in section 203(o) of the FLSA
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • November 4 2013

This morning the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Sandifer v. U.S. Steel, an FLSA case in a group of steelworkers at a Gary, Indiana factory


Offers of judgment, mootness and collective actions: Supreme Court hears oral argument in Genesis Healthcare v. Symczyk
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • December 4 2012

The Supreme Court heard argument in Genesis Healthcare v. Symczyk on Monday


Genesis of a clearer distinction between class and collective actions? Supreme Court decides Symczyc.
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • April 16 2013

The Supreme Court issued a groundbreaking ruling today in Genesis Healthcare Corp. v. Symczyk that brings into clearer focus the fundamental


Trifles and tribulations: Supreme Court decides meaning of “changing clothes” under 203(o) of the FLSA
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • January 27 2014

The Supreme Court ruled today that steelworkers are not entitled to pay for time spent changing into flame-retardant suits, hardhats, gloves, and


In its most surprising about-face to date, DOL abandons administrator's interpretation and sides with employer
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • July 30 2013

Those watching the U.S. Department of Labor in recent years have grown used to seeing major policy shifts. The DOL has issued guidance in the form of


Supreme Court to decide whether pharmaceutical sales representatives meet the FLSA's outside sales exemption
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • November 28 2011

At 10 a.m. EST today, the U.S. Supreme Court announced its decision to grant certiorari in Christopher v. SmithKline Beecham Corp


First Circuit’s administrative exemption decision could maintain the availability for the administrative exemption for some so-called “sales” employees
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • December 5 2011

On November 28, 2011, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit issued a decision in Hines v. State Room, Inc. finding that sales managers for a Boston banquet facility were exempt from overtime under the Fair Labor Standards Act's ("FLSA") administrative exemption