834 F.3d 872
8th Cir.2016Background
- EaglePicher operates a battery plant in Joplin, Missouri; hourly production employees are union-represented (Local 812).
- Employees routinely donned coveralls, smocks, safety glasses, and sometimes other PPE; prior CBAs since 1989 were interpreted to exclude pre-/post-shift donning/doffing from compensable time.
- The last signed CBA began in 2004 and expired May 2, 2008; bargaining broke down in 2008 and EaglePicher implemented a "last, best and final" offer effective June 2, 2008 (mirroring prior donning/doffing language).
- The union did not strike, members continued working, and the union filed numerous grievances under the implemented terms (including many concerning wages/hours); no grievance challenged the exclusion of donning/doffing pay.
- Employees sued under the FLSA and Missouri law claiming unpaid straight time and overtime for donning/doffing; the district court granted summary judgment for EaglePicher, holding §203(o) excluded the time from "hours worked."
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a "bona fide collective bargaining agreement" existed during the dispute period | No — the 2004 written CBA expired, so no bona fide CBA supports §203(o) exclusion | Yes — employer’s unilateral implementation plus union conduct created an implied-in-fact interim labor agreement | Court: An implied-in-fact interim labor agreement existed (union accepted by conduct beyond mere continued work) |
| Whether §203(o) can apply absent a signed written contract | §203(o) requires a bona fide CBA; unsigned interim terms do not qualify | An implied-in-fact CBA is "bona fide" for §203(o) purposes | Court: An implied-in-fact agreement can be a bona fide CBA under §203(o) |
| Whether donning/doffing time was excluded from "hours worked" by custom or practice under the agreement | Donning/doffing is compensable because no written CBA covered the period | Longstanding custom/practice (and prior CBAs) excluded donning/doffing; union acquiesced | Court: Donning/doffing excluded by custom/practice under the implied-in-fact agreement; §203(o) bars recovery |
Key Cases Cited
- Adair v. ConAgra Foods, Inc., 728 F.3d 849 (8th Cir. 2013) (interpretation of §203(o) and compensable time)
- United Paperworkers Int’l Union v. Champion Int’l Corp., 81 F.3d 798 (8th Cir. 1996) (requirements for forming interim labor agreement after impasse)
- McNealy v. Caterpillar, Inc., 139 F.3d 1113 (7th Cir. 1998) (acceptance of implemented terms may be proven by union conduct)
- Luden’s Inc. v. Local Union No. 6, 28 F.3d 347 (3d Cir. 1994) (implied-in-fact agreements and customs can bind parties post-impasse)
- Twin City Pipe Trades Serv. Ass’n v. Frank O’Laughlin Plumbing & Heating Co., 759 F.3d 881 (8th Cir. 2014) (collective bargaining obligations not dependent on written contract)
- H.J. Heinz Co. v. NLRB, 311 U.S. 514 (1941) (role of written contracts in collective bargaining context)