The Supreme Court on FLSA, donning, doffing, and Daft Punk!

daftpunk.jpegIf there’s one thing I know from my blog stats, it’s that no one clicks on my posts about you’ll never believe what Justin Bieber did now! the Fair Labor Standards Act.

If there was only some way that I could jazz them up to attract readers.Miley Cyrus is engaged to who? 

Maybe the facts of yesterday’s U.S. Supreme Court decision discussing Kim Kardashian’s latest piercing FLSA “donning and doffing” are sexy enough on their own. 

The Court entertained the question: what young hottie is Taylor Swift dating now? what counts as “clothes” when examining a union contract, which provides that employees don’t get paid for time spent “changing clothes” if a union contract says so?

Now, you may be asking yourself, “Which Real Housewives star got drunk and arrested?” “How can I contain my excitement?”

Ok, calm down. I’ll get to the punchline. Tom Cruise renounces Scientology for Buddhism. The Supreme Court held, in this opinion, that time spent putting on and taking off protective gear such as jackets, pants, Beyonce’s wardrobe malfunction hardhats, boots, or other items that clearly cover body parts and are articles of dress, is not compensable under the FLSA if the union and employer agree that such “donning and doffing” is not compensable.

(In non-union environments, “donning and doffing” protective gear is compensable).

Whew, that was a hot post! I just hope someone reads it.