29 C.F.R. § 785.8

Effect of custom, contract, or agreement

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

The principles are applicable, even though there may be a custom, contract, or agreement not to pay for the time so spent with special statutory exceptions discussed in §§ 785.9 and 785.26.

[35 FR 15289, Oct. 1, 1970]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 6 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1975–2023 · leading case: Barrentine v. Arkansas-Best Freight Sys., Inc., 450 U.S. 728 (1981).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Barrentine v. Arkansas-Best Freight Sys., Inc., 450 U.S. 728 (1981). · cites it 2× “Missel, supra, at 577 ; see 29 CFR § 785.8 (1974). [17] Moreover, we have held that congressionally granted FLSA rights take precedence over conflicting provisions in a collectively bargained compensation *741 arrangement.”

L. Mets Lerwill, Charles M. Perry, for Themselves & on Behalf of All Employees of Inflight Motion Pictures, Inc. v. Inflight Motion Pictures, Inc., 582 F.2d 507 (9th Cir. 1978). “See also 29 C.F.R. § 785.8 (1977). As the Court stated in Tennessee Coal, by the enactment of the Fair Labor Standards Act Congress intended .”

Frank Leone v. Mobil Oil Corp., 523 F.2d 1153 (D.C. Cir. 1975). “This theory is equally applicable to FLSA. In addition, just as the right to be free from discrimination cannot be waived by collective bargaining, id.”

Buero v. Amazon.com Servs., Inc., 521 P.3d 471 (Or. 2022). “Compare 29 CFR § 785.8 (providing that, with limited exceptions, hours worked are compensable irrespective of “custom, contract, or agreement not to pay for the time so spent”), with Rule 43(2) (providing that “[t]hese rules are applicable even where there exists a custom,…”

Lindsey Buero v. amazon.com Servs., Inc. (9th Cir. 2023). “Compare 29 CFR § 785.8 (providing that, with limited exceptions, hours worked are compensable irrespective of “custom, contract, or agreement not to pay for the time so spent”), with Rule 43(2) (providing that “[t]hese rules are applicable even where there exists a custom,…”

Zubair v. EnTech Eng'g P.C., 715 F. Supp. 2d 541 (S.D.N.Y. 2010). “The Court directed the parties to submit letter-briefs addressing the legal issues raised by Defendant’s assertion that the Contract is a defense to Zubair’s claims.”

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.