Oskaloosa.com

Community News Network

November 5, 2013

Worker-rights case asks court to define 'clothes'

WASHINGTON — A seemingly simple phrase can sometimes become stubbornly opaque when the lawyers at the Supreme Court get to it, and that was the case Monday when the justices examined what "changing clothes" means.

It is part of a case brought by Clifton Sandifer and 800 current and former workers at the U.S. Steel plant in Gary, Ind. They claim federal law requires them to be compensated for the time they spend putting on protective gear before reporting to their work stations.

U.S. Steel said the workers need not be paid because of an exception in the law that allows employers and unions to agree not to pay for "any time spent in changing clothes or washing at the beginning or end of each workday." Such an agreement is in place in Gary.

While washing is not part of the dispute, what constitutes "clothes" is at the heart of the matter.

Sandifer's attorney, Eric Schnapper of Seattle, said that "not everything an individual wears is clothes." He said it should not be difficult to differentiate between normal clothes and something unique that industrial workers must don and doff.

"Our test is: An item is not clothes if it is worn to protect against a workplace hazard and was designed to protect against hazards," he told the justices.

But the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit didn't accept that and previously ruled against the workers, who are required to wear flame-retardant jackets, pants, snood, gloves, wristlets and leggings.

That court took a picture of a model wearing the attire, and Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg held it up for Schnapper. "From the picture, that looks like clothes to me," she said.

Schnapper said this is a case in which a picture does not tell the story.

But Ginsburg said there were all kinds of jobs that require uniforms — bakers or doormen, for instance — and no one believes those workers should be paid for putting on clothing.

And there was a bit of real-life experience from the court. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., who worked summers in a steel plant to help pay for college, said there were particularly thick blue jeans that workers would wear at the plant but not elsewhere. Don't those protect from workplace hazards? he asked.

Lawyer Lawrence DiNardo, representing the steel company, said that the focus should be not on the items a worker wears but rather on the process of getting ready for work.

"Collective bargaining does not focus on whether or not a shirt is clothes or a pair of pants are clothes or protective eye gear, and that is how the statute was written," DiNardo said. "Given those two points, the term 'clothes' as used in the statute was intended to encompass the work outfit industrial workers were required to change into and out of to be ready for work. "

Justice Sonia Sotomayor said that would make something like a scuba tank "clothes" for some workers. And she had other examples:

"Your definition would include somebody spending an hour of putting on a suit of armor if he's going to be a jouster. It would include the space people who put on that complicated white suit that has all the connections to equipment."

The government proposed that the court differentiate between clothes and equipment.

"For instance," said Assistant Solicitor General Anthony M. Yang, "the meatpacker might have a chain mail" kind of sleeve, chain-mail gloves and a plexiglass "belly guard" as part of his work attire. Those would not be considered "clothes," he said.

Interest groups representing manufacturers and others said a ruling in favor of the workers could have a huge impact in back pay and other costs.

At the end of the hour-long argument, Justice Elena Kagan wondered why a government agency had never tackled the question of what the statute means when it says "clothes."

Schnapper said he did not know, but Justice Antonin Scalia offered a reason.

"Too complicated is why," he said.

The case is Sandifer vs. U.S. Steel.

1
Text Only
Community News Network
  • Why a see-through mouse is a big deal for scientists

    A group of Caltech researchers announced in Cell Thursday their success in making an entire organism transparent. Unfortunately, this isn't any kind of "Invisible Man" scenario: The organism in question is a mouse, and the mouse in question is quite dead.

    July 31, 2014

  • Screen Shot 2014-07-31 at 2.12.55 PM.png VIDEO: Five-year-old doesn't want her brother to grow up

    Sadie, an adorable 5-year-old from Phoenix, wants her brother to stay young forever, so much so that her emotional reaction to the thought of him getting older has drawn more than 10 million views on YouTube.

    July 31, 2014 1 Photo

  • lockport-police.jpg Police department turns to Facebook for guidance on use of 'negro'

    What seems to be a data entry mistake by a small town police department in western New York has turned into a social media firestorm centered around the word "negro" and whether it's acceptable to use in modern society.

    July 31, 2014 3 Photos

  • The virtues of lying

    Two computational scientists set out recently to simulate the effects of lying in a virtual human population. Their results, published in the Proceedings of the Royal Society B, show that lying is essential for the growth of a cohesive social network.

    July 31, 2014

  • Sunburn isn't the only sign of summer that can leave you itchy and blistered

    You've got a rash. You quickly rule out the usual suspects: You haven't been gardening or hiking or even picnicking, so it's probably not a plant irritant such as poison ivy or wild parsnip; likewise, it's probably not chiggers or ticks carrying Lyme disease; and you haven't been swimming in a pond, which can harbor the parasite that causes swimmer's itch.

    July 30, 2014

  • Survey results in legislation to battle sexual assault on campus

    Missouri U.S. Sen. Claire McCaskill joined a bipartisan group of senators Wednesday to announce legislation that aims to reduce the number of sexual assaults on college campuses.

    July 30, 2014

  • An alarming threat to airlines that no one's talking about

    It's been an abysmal year for the flying public. Planes have crashed in bad weather, disappeared over the Indian Ocean and tragically crossed paths with anti-aircraft missiles over Ukraine.

    July 30, 2014

  • Sharknado.jpg Sharknado 2 set to attack viewers tonight

    In the face of another "Sharknado" TV movie (the even-more-inane "Sharknado 2: The Second One," premiering Wednesday night on Syfy), there isn't much for a critic to say except to echo what the characters themselves so frequently scream when confronted by a great white shark spinning toward them in a funnel cloud:
    "LOOK OUT!!"

    July 30, 2014 1 Photo

  • 20140729-AMX-GIVHAN292.jpg Spanx stretches into new territory with jeans, but promised magic is elusive

    The Spanx empire of stomach-flattening, thigh-slimming, jiggle-reducing foundation garments has expanded to include what the brand promises is the mother of all body-shaping miracles: Spanx jeans.

    July 29, 2014 1 Photo

  • Medical marijuana opponents' most powerful argument is at odds with a mountain of research

    Opponents of marijuana legalization are rapidly losing the battle for hearts and minds. Simply put, the public understands that however you measure the consequences of marijuana use, the drug is significantly less harmful to users and society than tobacco or alcohol.

    July 29, 2014

Obituaries
Oskaloosa Shopper
Facebook
Hyperlocal Search
Premier Guide
Find a business

Walking Fingers
Maps, Menus, Store hours, Coupons, and more...
Premier Guide
Parade
Magazine

Click HERE to read all your Parade favorites including Hollywood Wire, Celebrity interviews and photo galleries, Food recipes and cooking tips, Games and lots more.
Photo reprints