C.F.R. » Title 29 » CHAPTER V—WAGE AND HOUR DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR › SUBCHAPTER B—STATEMENTS OF GENERAL POLICY OR INTERPRETATION NOT DIRECTLY RELATED TO REGULATIONS › PART 785—HOURS WORKED › Subpart C—Application of Principles

29 C.F.R. § 785.33

General

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

The principles which apply in determining whether or not time spent in travel is working time depend upon the kind of travel involved. The subject is discussed in §§ 785.35 to 785.41, which are preceded by a brief discussion in § 785.34 of the Portal-to-Portal Act as it applies to traveltime.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1972–2026 · leading case: United Transp. Union Local 1745 v. City of Albuquerque, 178 F.3d 1109 (10th Cir. 1999).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
United Transp. Union Local 1745 v. City of Albuquerque, 178 F.3d 1109 (10th Cir. 1999). · cites it 2× “” 29 C.F.R. § 785.33 . “Normal travel from home to work is not worktime.”
Pietrzycki v. Heights Tower Serv., Inc., 290 F. Supp. 3d 822 (E.D. Ill. 2017). “" 29 C.F.R. § 785.33 . Travel between jobsites and travel during which an employee does work must be counted as hours worked.”
Wade v. Carter, Jr. v. Panama Canal Co., 463 F.2d 1289 (D.C. Cir. 1972). “29 C.F.R. §§ 785.33 -.41 (1971). An examination of these regulations reveals a striking parallel between the descriptions of compensable travel time included therein and the enumerated categories of compensable travel found in the 1967 Act’s amendments to Section 5544.”
Marion Hughes v. UPS Supply Chain Solutions, Inc. (Ky. 2023). · cites it 4× “section 803 KAR 1:067 adopts which even makes mention of the Federal Law, 29 C.F.R. 785.33, only does so in referring to another (unadopted) regulation, 29 C.”
Marion Hughes v. UPS Supply Chain Solutions, Inc. (Ky. 2023). · cites it 4× “section 803 KAR 1:067 adopts which even makes mention of the Federal Law, 29 C.F.R. 785.33, only does so in referring to another (unadopted) regulation, 29 C.”
Lisa Johnson v. Amazon.com Servs. LLC (7th Cir. 2025). · cites it 4× “110 (“An employee’s travel, performed for the em- ployer’s benefit … is compensable work time as defined in 29 CFR 785.33 – 785.41 ….”). Finally, the regulations implementing the IMWL also pro- vide that the Director of the Illinois DOL may look to FLSA No.”
Johnson v. Amazon.com Servs., LLC, 2026 IL 132016 (Ill. 2026). “(“An employee’s travel, performed for the employer’s benefit *** is compensable work time as defined in 29 C.F.R. 785.33 — 785.41 ***.”). However, there is no reference to the PPA or USDOL regulations that establish a preliminary or postliminary activities exclusion from “hours…”
Browne v. PAM Transp. Inc (W.D. Ark. 2018). “” 29 C.F.R. § 785.33 (emphasis added). And with respect to work performed while driving or riding, yet another DOL regulation provides: Any work which an employee is required to perform while traveling must, of course, be counted as hours worked.”
Wagner v. Air Methods Corp. (D. Colo. 2021). “e’s travel, performed for the employer’s benefit (for example, in response to an emergency call back to work outside his/her normal work hours, or at the employer’s special request to perform a particular and unusual assignment, or as a part of the employee’s primary duty, or in…”
Dirbin v. Philly Mktg. Grp. Inc. (E.D. Pa. 2020). “” 29 C.F.R. § 785.33 . If “an employee is required to report at a meeting place to receive instructions or to perform other work there .”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.