Gerber Products Co. v. Hewitt
2016 Ark. 222
| Ark. | 2016Background
- Class action by hourly, nonexempt Gerber employees at Fort Smith alleging unpaid donning/doffing, handwashing, linting, and walking time that caused unpaid overtime in violation of the Arkansas Minimum Wage Act (AMWA).
- Employees alleged mandatory pre-shift donning (uniforms, PPE, handwashing, linting) and post-shift doffing; time of arrival was recorded at a turnstile before donning and some clock-out preceded doffing.
- Collective-bargaining agreements historically treated donning/doffing as noncompensable; 2013–2016 CBA later provided paid donning/doffing prospectively within 90 days of ratification; earlier contracts expressly excluded pay.
- Circuit court granted partial summary judgment for employees, holding donning/doffing (and related walking/waiting) are compensable under the AMWA and that the federal FLSA §203(o) exception does not apply to or get incorporated into the AMWA.
- Supreme Court of Arkansas affirmed: held donning/doffing are “work” under AMWA and collective-bargaining custom/agreement cannot make compensable time noncompensable; declined to engraft FLSA §203(o) into state law.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether mandatory donning/doffing (and related waiting/walking) constitutes "work" under the AMWA | Donning/doffing are mandatory, performed under employer procedures, benefit Gerber, and thus are work time requiring pay | These activities are preliminary/postliminary and noncompensable under FLSA principles; not "work" for overtime | Court: Donning/doffing are work under AMWA; Arkansas regs and statute defining "employ" as "suffer or permit to work" support compensability. |
| Whether a collective-bargaining agreement or custom can exclude donning/doffing from compensable time (i.e., incorporate FLSA §203(o)) | AMWA does not contain FLSA §203(o); statute forbids agreements that reduce overtime/minimum-wage protections; thus CBAs/customs cannot defeat AMWA rights | Gerber: State law should be interpreted consistent with FLSA; §203(o) exception applies to CBAs and union-negotiated exclusions should be honored; parties are sophisticated negotiators | Court: AMWA does not incorporate §203(o); Ark. Code §11-4-218(b) and plain statutory text prevent reading in the federal exception—CBAs/customs cannot make compensable time noncompensable. |
| Whether walking/waiting time tied to donning/doffing is compensable | Walking/waiting that is integral to mandatory donning/doffing is compensable because it is part of the required activities | Gerber: Walking time is compensable only if after a principal activity; if donning/doffing are non-principal, walking is noncompensable | Court: Because donning/doffing are compensable work, related walking and waiting time (post-donning to workstation; pre-doffing from clock to doffing area) is compensable. |
Key Cases Cited
- Quarles v. Courtyard Gardens Health & Rehab., 488 S.W.3d 513 (Ark. 2016) (summary-judgment standard cited)
- Okeke v. Dep’t of Veterans Affairs, 466 S.W.3d 399 (Ark. 2015) (noted that AMWA ‘‘appears to impose the same overtime requirements as the FLSA’’ but does not compel identical treatment)
- Tenn. Coal & Iron Co. v. Muscoda Local No. 123, 321 U.S. 590 (U.S. 1944) (early broad definition of "work" under FLSA)
- Anderson v. Mt. Clemens Pottery Co., 328 U.S. 680 (U.S. 1946) (broad scope of compensable worktime prompted legislative response)
- Sandifer v. United States Steel Corp., 134 S. Ct. 870 (U.S. 2014) (holding "changing clothes" may include protective garments under FLSA §203(o))
- Adair v. ConAgra Foods, Inc., 728 F.3d 849 (8th Cir. 2013) (federal precedent on walking time and principal activities)