Tobin v. Hudson Transit Lines, Inc.

95 F. Supp. 530, 1951 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2630
CourtDistrict Court, D. New Jersey
DecidedJanuary 31, 1951
DocketCiv. A. No. 11173
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 95 F. Supp. 530 (Tobin v. Hudson Transit Lines, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. New Jersey primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Tobin v. Hudson Transit Lines, Inc., 95 F. Supp. 530, 1951 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2630 (D.N.J. 1951).

Opinion

MEANEY, District Judge.

Plaintiff brings this action to enjoin defendant from violating the provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, 29 U.S.C.A. § 201 et seq., hereinafter called the Act. Jurisdiction is conferred by section 17 of the Act, 29 U.S.C.A. § 217, and by section 1337 of the Judicial Code, 28 U.S.C.A. § 1337.

Findings of Fact

1. Defendant is a Delaware corporation engaged in interstate bus transportation, its principal place of business being at Mahwah, N. J.

2. Marion Thompson, Margaret Murphy and Jeannette Wilkes were employed in a clerical capacity at the offices of the defendant. Prior to January, 1950 there existed an arrangement made by these employees among themselves with the approval of Gertrude Hewitt, the office supervisor, whereby each girl would work 35 hours one week and 42 hours the next week. Records of the hours of work were not kept. Since January, 1950 these employees have been paid on an hourly basis, working 35 hours per week. Proper records of the daily and weekly hours of each of these employees are now maintained.

3. Katherine Hunter and Veronica Stiech worked more than 40 hours a week at the Mahwah office for a period of four weeks during the summer of 1948, and they were compensated for the overtime worked at the rate of one thirty-eighth of their weekly salaries for each hour of overtime.

4. Melvin Lybolt, John Blair, Hyman Fradin, Harry Gordon, James Vincent Met-tiace and David Dragon are dispatchers: their regular duties consist of loading passengers, baggage and express, and dispatching the buses by telling the drivers when to take buses out. They sell tickets and make out dispatch sheets and ticket reports. They check the loading of baggage on overhead racks to see that none of it is placed so that it might fall down and injure the passengers. The baggage and express stowed in compartments underneath the bodies of the buses are checked by these men to insure equal distribution of weight. They keep passengers out of the way of moving buses at the terminals and transfer points. They assist passengers in boarding, and alighting from buses. They take care to see that no more than the permitted number of standees is carried in the buses. Occasionally the dispatchers make minor repairs to the buses, such as adjusting brakes or fixing windshield wipers. They have authority to take a bus out of service if it appears dangerous to run. They work more than 40 hours a week and are paid straight time.

5. Donald Baker, a dispatcher, was conceded to be exempt from the provisions of [533]*533the Act, since it appeared that it was a part of his duty to drive buses carrying passengers.

6. William Blauvelt does mechanical work and body repair work. He replaces posts between the windows, puts panels in, fixes seats, rewires buses, fixes lights, replaces glass that may be broken or cracked, and repairs baggage racks and grab-rails that may be loose. His hours of work exceed 40 per week, and he is paid straight time.

7. John Grost is assistant to the superintendent of maintenance. His duties are to help inspect buses, take care of inspection records, inspect undercarriages and axles, and to maintain preventive maintenance records. He works more than 40 hours a week and is paid straight time for all hours worked.

8. August Oetzel, Jr. and Charles Oetzel work at Harriman, N. Y. They sweep up the office, put gas in buses, help transfer passengers and baggage from one bus to another, wash buses, do minor repairs, fix fiat tires, oil buses and ¡fix lights. If passengers miss a bus, they drive them to the next transfer point in a company car. They drive the company car to pick up mail, and occasionally drive a bus after it has broken down. They both work more than 40 hours a week and are paid straight time.

9. Gilbert De Groat, Sr. and Gilbert De Groat, Jr. work at Mahwah, N. J. They are mechanics’ helpers working on preventive maintenance on springs, wheels and other parts. They grease parts, put gas in buses, help in making repairs, drive buses around garage, check for loose bolts, and inspect fire extinguishers and first aid kits. They work more than 40 hours weekly and are compensated on a straight time basis.

10. Arthur Buttress, Sr. and Martin H. Morris are employed by defendant as gas attendants at Mahwah, N. J. Their duties consist of driving buses from the garage down the highway to the gas pumps, and servicing buses coming in which need gas and oil. While so servicing buses, they observe casually whether fire extinguishers, axes and first aid kits are in place; they also look for oil or air pressure leaks, and check the tires; before gassing buses, they direct all passengers to leave, and caution them against smoking. They also clean buses and keep the place around the gas pumps clean. Their hours of work exceed 40 a week and they are paid on a straight time basis.

11. Robert Buttress works for the defendant corporation at Mahwah, N. J. as a stock clerk. He checks parts that go out of the stock room, buys necessary parts, and checks fire extinguishers to make sure they are full. He also checks first aid equipment and fire axes on buses in for preventive maintenance. He keeps a record of parts put in buses, checks to see that flares, fuses and flags are provided. He inspects used parts to determine whether they are to be replaced. He works more than 40 hours a week and is paid straight time.

12. Alice Greenfield is employed as a ticket seller and office assistant at Monticello, N. Y. During the summer her hours are from 4 P.M. to 12 midnight, in winter from 3 P.M. to 10 P.M., six days a week. Her time off averages 1 hour per day. Occasionally she has been paid an extra day’s pay for extra work done on busy week-ends. Since January 1, 1950 her hours of work have been recorded on a form provided by the defendant corporation.

13. Kenneth E. Bamberger has been employed as a dispatcher since May, 1946, at Mahwah, N. J. During a portion of that time he also served as night foreman of maintenance but now functions exclusively as a dispatcher. As a dispatcher he now directs others in driving buses, sees that passengers are loaded and unloaded in safety, and transfers baggage. While he was night foreman he had two mechanics under his supervision, Stafford and Fitzgerald, who repaired defects in the buses, two washers, Charles Le Bar and Floyd Robbins, who would also occasionally help the mechanics and move buses, and Romalo Gallupo, who cleaned the interiors of the coaches.

14. Rudolph Hilbig is employed as a painter; he works more than 40 hours weekly and is paid straight time. In addi[534]*534tion to painting, Hilbig fixes broken seats; he takes lights off and checks them; he replaces wiring, replaces with safety glass any broken glass, and works on windows and posts.

Discussion

Defendant quite readily admits that violations may have occurred with,respect to the clerical employees discussed in Finding of Fact number 2. It urges, however, that since the overtime work was the result of an arrangement worked out by the employees themselves, and in view of the fact that the practice has- been discontinued, no injunction. should issue. That the working of overtime hours was the result of an arrangement made by the employees themselves, would not excuse a violation. However, it would seem inequitable to issue an injunction in a situation such as this, where the violation did not exist at the time of trial, and a recurrence does not seem likely.

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

Related

Bayles v. American Medical Response of Colorado, Inc.
950 F. Supp. 1053 (D. Colorado, 1996)
Caserta v. Home Lines Agency, Inc.
172 F. Supp. 409 (S.D. New York, 1959)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
95 F. Supp. 530, 1951 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2630, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tobin-v-hudson-transit-lines-inc-njd-1951.