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 790—GENERAL STATEMENT AS TO THE EFFECT OF THE PORTAL-TO-PORTAL ACT OF 1947 ON THE FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT OF 1938

29 C.F.R. § 790.11

Contract, custom or practice in effect “at the time of such activity.”

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

The “contract,” “custom” or “practice” on which the compensability of the activities referred to in section 4 of the Portal Act may be based, is a contract, custom or practice in effect “at the time of such activity.” Thus, the compensability of such an activity, and its inclusion in computation of hours worked, is not determinable by a custom or practice which had been terminated before the activity was engaged in or was adopted some time after the activity was performed. This phrase would also seem to permit recognition of changes in customs, practices and agreements which reflect changes in labor-management relations or policies.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 2010–2013 · leading case: Richard Chambers v. Sears Roebuck & Co., 428 F. App'x 400 (5th Cir. 2011).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Richard Chambers v. Sears Roebuck & Co., 428 F. App'x 400 (5th Cir. 2011). · cites it 3× “§ 254(b)(2); 29 C.F.R. § 790.11 (“the compensability of [an activity alleged to be compensable by custom or practice], and its inclusion in computation of hours *422 worked, is not determinable by a custom or practice which had been terminated before the activity was engaged in .”
Little v. Technical Specialty Prods., LLC, 940 F. Supp. 2d 460 (E.D. Tex. 2013). “” 29 C.F.R. § 790.11 . The regulations also permit the “recognition of changes in customs, practices and *474 agreements which reflect changes in labor-management relations or policies.”
Chambers v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 793 F. Supp. 2d 938 (S.D. Tex. 2010). · cites it 3× “§ 254(b)(2); 29 C.F.R. § 790.11 (“the compensability of [an activity alleged to be compensable by custom or practice], and its inclusion in computation of hours worked, is not determinable by a custom or practice which had been terminated before the activity was engaged in .”
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.