Gillette v. Rockland Coaches, Inc.

142 F.2d 616, 1944 U.S. App. LEXIS 3469
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit
DecidedMay 8, 1944
DocketNo. 286
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 142 F.2d 616 (Gillette v. Rockland Coaches, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Gillette v. Rockland Coaches, Inc., 142 F.2d 616, 1944 U.S. App. LEXIS 3469 (2d Cir. 1944).

Opinion

AUGUSTUS N. HAND, Circuit Judge.

This is an appeal by the plaintiff, an employee of Rockland Coaches, Inc., from a judgment dismissing his complaint and granting summary judgment for the defendant under the Fifth Defense of the answer. The action was to recover overtime under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, 29 U.S.C.A. § 201 et seq. The complaint alleged that the plaintiff was employed by the defendant at the latter’s garage plant at Spring Valley, New York, and that pursuant to such employment he was required to perform, and did perform, the following services:

(a) checking and re-setting the socalled “National” ticket machines contained in each of 86 buses owned and operated by defendant;

(b) working at the gas pumps fueling buses;

(c) keeping records of oil supplied to buses;

(d) checking oil and tires;

(e) furnishing to drivers bridge tolls and tickets;

(f) changing insurance “stickers” on all-buses; and

(g) fueling owners’ cars.

The complaint further alleged that during the period between October 24, 1938 and October 24, 1940, plaintiff was employed for some 2900 overtime hours and by reason of such overtime was entitled under the Fair Labor Standards Act to receive $1,695.92 as liquidated damages, plus a reasonable counsel fee.

The defendant alleged in its answer as a Fifth Defense that it was a local motor bus carrier as defined in Section 13(a) (9) of the Fair Labor Standards Act and as such was not governed by the provisions of Sections 6 and 7 which prescribe minimum wages and maximum hours for employees engaged in commerce among several states, or from any state to any place outside..

Section 13(a) (9) provides that Sections 6 and 7 shall not apply to “any employee of a street, suburban, or interurban electric railway, or local trolley or motor bus carrier, not included in other exemptions contained in this section.”

The defendant moved for a summary judgment in its favor on the ground that it is a “local * * * motor bus carrier” as defined in Section 13(a) (9) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. We think that the judgment to the defendant upon, this motion was right and should be affirmed.

The sole question raised by this appeal is whether the defendant is subject to the provisions for wages and overtime of Sections 6 and 7 of the Fair Labor Standards Act, or is exempt from those provisions because, within the meaning of Section 13 (a) (9), .it is a “local * * * motor bus carrier” as held by the court below.

The defendant transports “commuters” in interstate commerce who in the morning travel from their homes to their places of work and return at night. These commuters constitute about 75% of its traffic, which in addition consists of school children, shoppers and the general public. During the rush hours there is a headway of approximately three minutes for each bus going to New York City in the morning, and for each bus going from New York City to New Jersey in the evening.

The routes of the company begin in Spring Valley and Nyack, New York, and [618]*618go through Bergen County, New Jersey, to New York City over the George Washington Bridge. They terminate either at 167th Street near the George Washington Bridge, or at the Midtown Bus Terminal of New York, Inc., where other local motor bus operators from other points in New Jersey have their New York Terminus. ' The defendant picks up and dischárges. interstate passengers along its en7 tiré' routes. These routes pass thrpqgh suburban towns and villagés in New Jersey arid terminate in New York Citv, which is the principal place whither traffic goes and 'from which it comes. No baggagé or bundles for the buses may be checked and only such luggage may be carried as can be handled by the passengers. There is a package or baggage rack in all buses for use by passengers but no trunks or packages are permitted of such size as to interfere with passengers in entering or leaving the bus.

The fares of all companies are fixed by zones, that is, from one municipality to another, rather than by mileage, and the buses will pick up and discharge interstate passengers all along their route. This is even true of buses marked'“Express”. To what extent interstate carriers may be given intrastate privileges over certain portions of their interstate routes is quite immaterial because the question before us is only whether the defendant is a local interstate carrier under the Fair Labor Standards Act and, as an interstate carrier, would have no obligations under Sections 6 and 7 of that Act.

The defendant operates under a Certificate of War Necessity issued by the'Office of Defense Transportation certifying its operations as for “local service” and has no certification for “road”, or “over the road”, or “long haul” services. The certificate was issued after the defendant had submitted a detailed report as to its past activities. In order to determine whether an operator is a “local” operator the Office of Defense Transportation has laid down three alternative tests, the first and third of which are met by the defendant. Executive Orders Nos. 8989, 9156, General Orders O. D. T. 11 and 21, Instructions page 9:

“Local bus service. The following iristructions apply to bus operations in ‘local service’, which include (1) those, wholly within any municipality or urban community and a zone extending 15 air miles from the boundaries thereof, or bétween contiguous municipalities or urban communities, or (2) round-trip schedules on which the average revenue per passenger carried is not more than 35 cents, or (3) round-trip schedules whose principal traffic consists of the movement of workers en route between their homes and their places of employment, or the movement of persons between military or naval establishments and nearby municipalities or urban communities.”

The Interstate Corrimerce Commission has described the business of interstate motor bus carriers as “local” in respect to the maximum hours of service of its employees when there is mass transportation morning and evening and frequent schedules are maintained, as between Newark, Jersey City and New York. Likewise it has relieved transportation carriers (on the ground that they are “local”) from keeping a driver’s log containing records of the time of each stop and of each crossing of a state line while on a schedule over a regular route “mainly in urban and suburban areas and when such regular route is not longer than 35 miles”. Ex parte No. M. C. 2, 24 M. C. C. 415.

Similarly in Chapter 15, Article 1, Section 1 of Rules and Regulations, the City of New York has defined a Short Haul Omnibus as “an intrastate or interstate omnibus operating to or from a point not more than fifty miles from Columbus Circle in the City of New York”. See decision in Bus Depot Holding Company v. Valentine, 288 N.Y. 115, 41 N.E.2d 913. Record on Appeal, page 626.

We think it clear that the Wages and Hours Administrator has given the words “local * * .* motor bus carrier”, in Section 13(a) (9), a meaning that excludes the defendant from the wages and hours provisions of Sections 6 and 7 of the Fair Labor Standards Act. In the First Annual Report of the Administrator he said (at p.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
142 F.2d 616, 1944 U.S. App. LEXIS 3469, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gillette-v-rockland-coaches-inc-ca2-1944.