October Term 2013 · Docket 12-417
Does the FLSA require employers to pay for donning and doffing safety gear?
the sides that brought the case seek compensation for time spent putting on and removing protective equipment. the opposing sides argue this time falls outside the statutory definition of clothes.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Mr. Schnapper argued not everything worn is clothes.
Mr. Dinardo noted the Portal-to-Portal Act context.
Justices questioned the boundary between ordinary and protective gear.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 37-41 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 37-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 15-19 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 15-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-47 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 43, lines 9-11 — Transcript, file page 43, lines 9-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 29-35 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 29-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 3-3 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 3-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 49-1 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 49-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 17-35 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 17-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 37-37 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 37-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 39-41 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 39-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 47-1 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 47-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 11-29 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 11-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 51-7 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 51-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 29-39 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 29-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 49-3 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 49-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 21-25 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 21-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 31-33 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 31-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 19-45 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 19-45
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
The case centers on the definition of clothes under the Fair Labor Standards Act. the sides that brought the case argue safety gear counts as clothes. the opposing sides argue only ordinary garments qualify.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 15-19 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 15-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-47 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 43, lines 9-11 — Transcript, file page 43, lines 9-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 37-37 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 37-37
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on November 4, 2013.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 47-1 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 47-1
What each side wants
the sides that brought the case want employers to pay for time spent donning and doffing safety gear.
the opposing sides want to exclude safety gear from the definition of clothes.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 15-19 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 15-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-47 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 43, lines 9-11 — Transcript, file page 43, lines 9-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 37-37 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 37-37
What each side says
the sides that brought the case argue safety gear functions as clothing under the statute.
the opposing sides argue only ordinary garments qualify as clothes.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 15-19 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 15-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-47 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 43, lines 9-11 — Transcript, file page 43, lines 9-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 37-37 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 37-37
What the justices asked
Justice Sotomayor asked if leggings count as clothes.
Justice Alito asked if protection against hazards defines clothing status.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 37-41 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 37-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 29-35 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 29-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 3-3 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 3-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 49-1 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 49-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 17-35 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 17-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 39-41 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 39-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 47-1 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 47-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 11-29 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 11-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 51-7 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 51-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 29-39 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 29-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 49-3 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 49-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 21-25 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 21-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 31-33 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 31-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 19-45 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 19-45
Why it matters
The outcome determines whether workers receive pay for safety gear preparation time. This affects compensation standards for millions of industrial employees nationwide.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 15-19 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 15-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-47 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 43, lines 9-11 — Transcript, file page 43, lines 9-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 37-37 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 37-37
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 37-41 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 37-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 29-35 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 29-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 3-3 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 3-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 49-1 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 49-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 17-35 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 17-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 39-41 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 39-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 47-1 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 47-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 11-29 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 11-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 51-7 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 51-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 29-39 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 29-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 49-3 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 49-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 21-25 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 21-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 31-33 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 31-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 19-45 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 19-45
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 15-19 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 15-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-47 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 43, lines 9-11 — Transcript, file page 43, lines 9-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 37-37 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 37-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 15-19 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 15-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-47 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 43, lines 9-11 — Transcript, file page 43, lines 9-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 37-37 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 37-37
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.