|
|
Walling v. Portland Terminal Co., 330 U.S. 148 (1947)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
Walling v. Portland Terminal Co., 330 U.S. 148 (1947)
Walling v. Portland Terminal Co. No. 336 Argued January 17, 1947 Decided February 17, 1947 330 U.S. 148
CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
Syllabus
For many years, a railroad has given to prospective yard brakemen a practical course of training lasting seven or eight days. Under the supervision of a yard crew, each trainee first learns routine activities by observation and is then gradually permitted to do actual work under close scrutiny. His activities do not displace any of the regular employees, who do most of the work themselves and must stand immediately by to supervise what the trainee does. The trainee’s work does not expedite the railroad’s business, but may, and sometimes does, actually impede and retard it. Trainees who complete the course satisfactorily and are certified as competent are listed as eligible for employment when needed. Prior to October 1, 1943, trainees received no pay or allowance of any kind, but, since that date, those who prove their competency and are listed as eligible for employment are given a retroactive allowance of $4 per day for their training period.
Held:
1. Such a trainee is not an "employee" within the meaning of § 3(e) of the Fair Labor Standards Act. Pp. 152-153.
2. Section 14, which authorizes the Wage and Hour Administrator to permit the employment of learners and apprentices at less than the minimum wage prescribed by the Act, is inapplicable to such trainees, since it relates only to learners who are in "employment," and carries no implication that all instructors must either get a permit or pay minimum wages to all learners. Pp. 151-152.
155 F.2d 215, affirmed.
The Wage and Hour Administrator sued a railroad to enjoin alleged violations of §§ 15(a)(2) and 15(a)(5) of the Fair Labor Standards Act, 52 Stat. 1060. The District Court denied the injunction. 61 F.Supp. 345. The Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed. 155 F.2d 215. This Court granted certiorari. 329 U.S. 696. Affirmed, p. 153.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," Walling v. Portland Terminal Co., 330 U.S. 148 (1947) in 330 U.S. 148 330 U.S. 149. Original Sources, accessed November 22, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=XBABNFQRGLQCI4T.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." Walling v. Portland Terminal Co., 330 U.S. 148 (1947), in 330 U.S. 148, page 330 U.S. 149. Original Sources. 22 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=XBABNFQRGLQCI4T.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in Walling v. Portland Terminal Co., 330 U.S. 148 (1947). cited in 1947, 330 U.S. 148, pp.330 U.S. 149. Original Sources, retrieved 22 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=XBABNFQRGLQCI4T.
|