The United States’ Supreme Court recently ruled that the time US Steel workers spend putting on and taking off necessary protective gear required by the company is not compensable under Section 203 (o) of the Fair Labor Standards Act, because their Collective Bargaining Agreement does not allow compensation for “changing clothes.”  Sandifer et al v. United States Steel Corp.,  ___ U.S. ___ (2014).

In Sandifer, U.S. Steel workers sought compensation for putting on and removing protective gear they are required to wear.  They sought compensation for the time but U.S. Steel refused.  The Supreme Court noted that the FLSA permits a CBA to address whether “changing clothes” is compensable time, and that absent a CBA the workers would have a right to compensation.  The Court held that the donning and doffing of protective gear falls under the commonly understood definition of “changing clothes,” and the claim could not be salvaged by the fact that 3 of the 12 items at issue were safety glasses, a respirator and earplugs.

The Court noted that if an employee devotes the vast majority of time to putting on and off equipment or other non-clothes items, the entire period would NOT qualify as “time spent in changing clothes” under 203(o), and thus would be compensable – even if some clothing items were doffed and donned.