Posts Tagged ‘Congress

19
Jun
13

What Packing and Cracking does to Voting Rights


Elbridge Gerry (1744–1814), American statesman

Elbridge Gerry (1744–1814), American statesman (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Easter and Memorial break are over, Congress seems to work only 3 days a week and while nothing is being done they always take and have time for name-calling and political games; so let the BS commence because we all know that they are working for the people right? It is time to take Republicans onto the floor of Congress and wipe up the floor with their ideologies.

just another rant …

The things on my mind while Congress took a few days off; hopefully members of Congress have heard their constituents voices about Gun Safety, keeping ACA intact, reproductive rights safely in the hands of Women and their families, ending the Sequester, Paycheck Fairness, Immigration and Medicaid just to name a few. Lest we forget that Republican Governors continue to pass, ridiculous Family Values bills while squashing social service programs for the poor.

I also hope the constant racial comments by people voted into Public Office, which, sadly is slurped up by people who seem to be listening and following like lemmings  not only affects people of colour ends. It shows the World how primitive we truly are while our constitution, civil and human right achievements seem like documents and sensibilities with absolutely no value or power.  The public needs to stay informed; elections suffice it to say have consequences. The fact is midterm elections are just as important as the National Elections … especially in years when gerrymandering or as they say when redistricting goes into full effect that lumps, separates, destroys diverse communities and robs some of their voting rights allowing more extreme tea party members onto the Congressional floor

In December 1975, the Congress passed Public Law (P.L.) 94-171. This law requires the Census Bureau to make special preparations to provide redistricting data to the 50 states no later than April 1 of the year following a census (so April 1, 2011, for the 2010 Census). P.L. 94-171 specifies that within 1 year of Census Day, the Census Bureau must send each state the small-area data the state will need to redraw districts for the state legislature.

P.L. 94-171 sets up a voluntary program between the Census Bureau and those states that wish to receive population tabulations for voting districts and other state-specified geographic areas.

Under this program, those responsible for the legislative apportionment or redistricting of each state may devise a plan identifying the voting districts for which they want the specific tabulations and submit it to the Census Bureau.

Beginning in 2005, the Redistricting Data Office of the Census Bureau met with state officials in 46 states. These meetings explained the timeline and programs available for the 2010 Census, providing states the time to prepare and allocate resources in advance of the census. The states also provided the Census Bureau with valuable feedback on census program planning.

The 2010 Census Redistricting Data Program is a five-phase program. During Phase 1 (2005–2006), the Census Bureau collected state legislative district boundaries and associated updates to tabulate legislative districts. This phase also included an aggressive 2010 Census communications plan, with visits to state capitals, to make sure the states were informed and prepared for the upcoming census.

Phase 2 (2008–2010) consisted of the Voting District/Block Boundary Suggestion Project (VTD/BBSP) in which states received TIGER/Line® shapefiles and the MAF/TIGER Partnership Software (MTPS) to electronically collect voting district boundaries, feature updates, suggested block boundaries, and corrected state legislative district boundaries. Both Phase 1 and Phase 2 are voluntary programs that include a step where the state verifies the submitted data.

Phase 3 constitutes the delivery of the data for the 2010 Census. The Census Bureau will deliver the geographic and data products to the majority and minority leadership in the state legislatures, the governors, and any designated P.L. 94-171 liaisons. Once bipartisan receipt of the data is confirmed, the data will be made available online to the public within 24 hours through the American FactFinder. For this census, the P.L. 94-171 data will include population counts for small areas within each state, as well as housing occupied/vacancy counts.

After the Census Bureau provides the data, the states will begin their redistricting. States are responsible for delineating their own congressional and legislative boundaries and their legislatures. Legislatures, secretaries of state, governors, and/or redistricting commissions carry out the process.  

Go to census.gov for the complete article …

Republicans on the floor of Congress continue to stall, block, scale down bills, and or add nasty amendments no one could vote for in good faith while providing misinformation and misinterpretation to the public any chance they can. We the People cannot afford to vote for  politicians who put Political Party over doing the Peoples business; though Republicans would have the public believe it is in our best interest.  Remember Speaker Boehner said his maim concern was jobs jobs jobs among other things… the question is how many jobs bills did Republicans bring to the floor, how many Senate jobs bills were rejected and last how many awful amendments were attached. Yes, biased, but I don’t think it’s in the best interest of Americans to side on the party of no; people need to make the effort to listen to what and how bills are handled by Republicans.

We need and must move into the 21st Century if we plan to get back on track and to do so Republicans must accept that PBO won a second term has earned the right to govern … Americans … 53% of us said YES to his ideas, policies and desire to move forward.

For your information wiki states, “Gerrymandering is effective because of the wasted vote effect.

So, what do Packing and Cracking mean to you …

- Packing opposition voters into districts (concentrate as many voters of one type -( maybe party&race ) means they already win and by …

- Cracking the remainder among districts where they are moved into the minority (increasing votes for eventual losers), the number of wasted votes among the opposition can be maximized. Similarly, with supporters holding narrow margins in the unpacked districts, the number of wasted votes among supporters is minimized.

The Etymology

First printed in March 1812, this political cartoon was drawn in reaction to the state senate electoral districts drawn by the Massachusetts legislature to favour the Democratic-Republican Party candidates of Governor Elbridge Gerry over the Federalists. The caricature satirises the bizarre shape of a district in Essex County, Massachusetts as a dragon-like “monster.” Federalist newspapers editors and others at the time likened the district shape to a salamander, and the word gerrymander was a blend of that word and Governor Gerry‘s last name.

 Resources: Census.gov
 and Wiki
written 4/7/2013
18
Jun
13

Scalia did what?!


By  ThinkProgress War Room

Surprise Move by Conservative Justice Boosts Voter Rights

We are down to the final two weeks of the Supreme Court’s term, which means all of the most important rulings of the term will come down over the next few days. The most hotly anticipated rulings in cases regarding marriage equality, the Voting Rights Act, and affirmative action in higher education are yet to come, but voting rights advocates received a pleasant surprise this morning from one of the High Court’s most conservative justices.

Writing for a seven-member majority, Justice Scalia threw out an Arizona law that required proof of citizenship in order to register to vote. (Federal law and the federal voter registration form at issue already requires voters to attest under penalty of perjury that they are citizens.) Scalia wrote that a federal law known as the Motor Voter law superseded Arizona’s desire to impose additional obstacles on those seeking to register and vote in federal elections.

As ThinkProgress’ Ian Millhiser outlines, the opinion rests upon a rather sweeping federal power to regulate elections:

The Constitution permits duly enacted federal laws to trump state law, a process known as “preemption.” Normally, however, courts should apply a presumption against preemption and assume that Congress did not intend to invalidate state law if the matter is uncertain. Scalia’s opinion holds that this presumption does not apply with respect to federal laws regulating federal elections, a holding which suggests Congress’ power to sweep away state election laws is quite sweeping.

As the Court points out, this broad view of the federal role in governing elections is consistent with the Constitution’s text, which provides that “[t]he times, places and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by law make or alter such regulations.” So a future Congress more supportive of voting rights has the power to sweep away voter ID laws and other methods of voter suppression that have recently popped up mostly in conservative states. By contrast, a future Congress more keen to voter suppression may have significant authority to impose its will on the nation, although this power would be checked by constitutional safeguards against many forms of voter suppression.

It’s also worth noting that the impact of the Arizona law has not been merely theoretical. According to the Mexican American Legal Defense Fund, the group that originally filed suit against the law, in the two year period following the law’s enactment, more than 31,500 voter registration applications were rejected owing to lack of proof of citizenship. Because most people don’t carry proof of citizenship like a passport or birth certificate around with them, the law made voter registration drives in places like malls exceedingly difficult. And indeed, community voter registration dropped 44 percent in Maricopa County, Arizona’s most populous county.

To no one’s surprise, Tea Party darling Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) has already promised that he will file an amendment to the immigration bill in order to once again allow states to disenfranchise people. This marks just the latest attempt by Cruz to torpedo the immigration bill with a poison pill amendment.

BOTTOM LINE: A lot of rulings are yet to come, including a very important case regarding the Voting Rights Act, but today’s ruling is good news for voters and further empowers Congress to do more to protect voting rights across the country.

Evening Brief: Important Stories That You Might’ve Missed

The Supreme Court also went after big pharma today.

Latest leaks are distracting from the real conversation about government surveillance.

A pragmatist won the Iranian election.

POLL: Americans oppose arming the Syrian rebels.

Birtherism is back in the halls of Congress.

Christian college expels lesbian, then demands she pay back financial aid.

The Florida governor’s latest attack on working families.

In many states, it’s harder to get an abortion than to buy a gun.

The GOP base is still obsessed with abortion.

18
Jun
13

Meals for Seniors and Head Start ~~~ End the Sequester


Sarasota - Meals on Wheels

Sarasota – Meals on Wheels (Photo credit: roger4336)

Tonight, chances are a senior in your community will go to bed hungry.


********************************************************************
Send a message to Congress   and President Obama to find a way to
end sequestration now!
Head Start Gets Results
18
Jun
13

CARE2


 

Coral reefs: stunning, diverse, found worldwide, and incredibly fragile, despite the fact that they look like they’re made from stone. These…
                                    26 members of Congress will live off of a food stamp budget for a week to draw attention to House Republicans cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition…
read more
                                    Five reasons that austerity does not only bite but can inflict long-term damage to people’s pockets, their psyches, their livelihoods and lives.
read more

————————————————–

18
Jun
13

VIDEO: The tour begins


Last Friday, the No More Names bus tour left Newtown, CT to bring the personal stories of gun violence victims and survivors directly to the doorsteps of our elected leaders.  Please watch a brief video we made of the launch event in Newtown, then donate $33 or more to keep the No More Names bus going to key states.

Watch this video from the No More Names launch and donate today

More than 250 people attended Friday’s launch in Newtown, and more than 30 press outlets covered the event.1 Our goal is to visit 25 states over the next 100 days.  We’ll be stopping in each state to read the names of more than 6,000 people who have been murdered with guns since the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary. At each stop on the tour we’ll confront members of Congress and make sure they know that every day they delay common sense gun reform, more names will be added to the thousands who’ve already been murdered with guns since Newtown. But to keep the tour going and reach key states across the country, we need donations from supporters like you. Your donation will go farther at the start of the tour — so please give $33 or more right now:
https://donate.demandaction.org/donate/NMN_Donation1/
Thanks for all you do, Mark Glaze Mayors Against Illegal Guns
P.S. — The No More Names bus tour won’t reach all 25 states without your support,  Please give $33 or more today.
——— 1. Click here for press coverage of Friday’s event.

14
Jun
13

Mayors Against Illegal Guns


Leaders in Congress have committed to bringing background checks up for another vote. To win, there’s only one thing we need to do: Make sure key members of Congress can’t ignore the overwhelming majority of Americans demanding action.
That’s why we’re literally going to park on their front lawns.
City by city, we will read the names of all those who’ve been killed with guns since Newtown and hand deliver those names to Senate and House district offices.
We’re rolling the No More Names bus right up up to local Congressional offices all across the country — and if you step up right now and donate $33 or more, we can keep it going all summer long.

Keep the No More Names tour going

Our grassroots organizing strategy here boils down to two key elements:
First: We take the fight to the local offices of our elected leaders and demand they take action to support background checks for all commercial gun sales. We’ve already got 175 co-sponsors for a background checks bill in the House, and Senate leaders have committed to bringing this vote back up. And now we’ve got a bus that’s ready to visit leaders all across the country. We’ll park in front of their home offices so they can’t ignore the 90% of Americans who support common-sense background checks for all gun sales.
Second: You. This is the critical part. You, and supporters like you, who want to get these laws passed are the only people who can make our strategy work.
I’ve seen a lot of these fights — we’ve won some and lost some.  I’m ready to give this one everything I’ve got, but I know it all hangs in the balance with what you decide to do right now.
Please give $33 or more to keep the bus on the road until we talk to every one of our leaders who needs to hear from us:

https://donate.demandaction.org/donate/NoMoreNames_Donation1/

We can win this. We can make historic change that keeps Americans safe from tragic and preventable gun violence. But we won’t win unless we can fight it, and that starts with you stepping up to donate today.
Thanks for everything you do. I’ll keep you in the loop on how we’re doing.
Mitch
Mitch Stewart Mayors Against Illegal Guns

13
Jun
13

If not now, When?


mayorsagainstguns

just another rant …

The months wear on but no one has forgotten Newtown … more deaths from hand guns and another massacre has taken place … Tell your member of or a Republican that the time has come for #GunSafety #GunReform

I am against handguns … period.  The incidents my family, friends even some co-workers have experienced have molded my attitude over the years, and a narrow escape or two of my own. The thought of a teacher being responsible for having or being forced to keep a handgun or anything larger in the classroom just does not make sense.

As more Americans watch, wait and wonder when Congress will take a stand on gun control, more say there is absolutely no reason a civilian should own or have access to an assault weapon. The fact is assault weapons, the standard infantry combat choice for most modern armies has no place in a civil society.  Police already have trouble protecting and serving our communities against illegal guns, legislation that broadly regulates the firearms industry and firearms owners let alone automatic weapons solely made and meant to kill people quickly.

At what point will our members of Congress, the firearm industry and owners stand up speak up or out over the current stalemate to move gun laws into the 21st Century. The NRA has been a thorn in all our sides, spending millions lobbying for gun rights while controlling votes in Congress. The Second Amendment, states: “A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a Free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”   I have to say, who doesn’t believe this amendment is in dire need of revaluation for the lives of our citizens.

In 1994, Congress added a background check system to strengthen our existing laws to keep guns out of the hands of felons, drug abusers, and the mentally ill. In 2004, Congress let the assault weapons ban expire. It is time to recognize and change the flaws in the background check system that have enabled folks to arrange hits, commit heinous crimes, violent deaths or massacres like Columbine, Virginia Tech, Arizona, Michigan, Washington state Colorado, Chicago , Texas and Santa Monica

If not now, when is a good question.

written 4/2013

13
Jun
13

Women’s Rights : past present future … it’s everyday


“Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.”

-George Orwell

oh yeah, it’s a rant …

Womenshc

a repost tweeked

So, we are in the 21st Century, Women have a constitutional right to have an abortion yet folks like Rep.Trent Franks act as if they know what is best for all Women, which if you just think about that . Why is he throwing all Women into to one basket? The fact is common sense that is, that Women lead very different lives make individual decisions every minute … duh and an abortion is just one of several health care issues Women may have to encounter.  The best solutions are Birth Control PlanB in all their forms as well as safe affordable legal constitutional right to abortion. I find it beyond offensive to hear Republicans infer that an abortion is chosen carelessly and for those who seem to think birth control in all its forms is a federal or states right issue actually use it as a Republican political football.  The fact is that Republicans with Women in their lives forget that their position pushes up against 98% of those who use birth control.  They need to stop and focus on Jobs, Immigration, ending the Sequester, Climate Change among just a few. I say until republicans come to their senses vote for the Democratic Party that supports upward mobility as well as the middle lower classes and the poor

I came across an article by Dave Thompson from The Denver Post. It appears as though the mission to demean control and or shutter a Woman’s right to choose is alive and well as North Dakota‘s Senate successfully passed what is called the” heart beat” bill, my first response was … say Wha?  We have just entered the twilight zone or maybe daylight savings has caused some chaos in North Dakota but then I read on and found that…

“Senators also approved a second bill that bans abortions based solely on genetic abnormalities, the first state ban of its kind if signed into law. The bill would also ban abortions based on the gender of the fetus, which would make North Dakota the fourth state to ban sex-selection based abortions.”  All on Friday!

Call N.D. Republican Governor, Jack Dalrymple and ask him why ? 701 328 2200

for the complete article click on the link below

Read more: North Dakota Senate approves “heartbeat” abortion ban – The Denver Post

Hey, whatever happened to taking” liberty” under the Bill of Rights and “freedom” under Civil Liberties seriously – and both could be at risk

On Sunday, January 22, 2012, President Obama released a statement letting Women know that he is reaffirming his promise to protect a woman’s right to choose.    Announcing that  “After evaluating comments, we have decided to add an additional element to the final rule  Nonprofit employers who, based on religious beliefs, do not currently provide contraceptive coverage in their insurance plan, will be provided an additional year, until August 1, 2013, to comply with the new law. Employers wishing to take advantage of the additional year must certify that they qualify for the delayed implementation. This additional year will allow these organizations more time and flexibility to adapt to this new rule. We intend to require employers that do not offer coverage of contraceptive services to provide notice to employees, which will also state that contraceptive services are available at sites such as community health centers, public clinics, and hospitals with income-based support. We will continue to work closely with religious groups during this transitional period to discuss their concerns.”

There have been changes to the announcement above as well as big changes to health care for women … in a good way and more to come. If you don’t know,  please know that because of the new health care law women can now look forward to less discrimination and you do not have to be poor to benefit … can I just say that again, women will NOT be discriminated against anymore.  We know some in the insurance field, doctors and or hospitals will try to beat the system, but the law is there to refer to now and covers All Americans not just some. It is hard for me to believe pro-lifers do not understand that every part of a woman’s health is subject to being penalized and that includes reproductive health care, which includes a wide range of health care issues.  It is bad enough that lawmakers actually would subject women to demeaning practices like undergo a transvaginal scope; make them wait 72hrs, but to make doctors liable for jail time too.  I have to say that among other ridiculous laws that need a vote in Congress, The Hyde Amendment requires a vote every year.  I also admit that it pisses me off that the latest group of people in office are still getting away with saying one thing and do another which includes forcing their “family values” platform/ideology on what I thought were free Americans. What year is it again?  If the Republican Tea Party truly wants smaller government, they should stop trying to control women, their bodies and or change laws for the sake of that “family values” platform that is definitely the epitome of big government and an invasion of privacy.Npelosiwomenshc

The right seems to be aligning their demands for stricter abortion laws one state at a time. I cannot be the only one tired of the “Do as we say Not as we do Political Party of NO. It has my blood boiling. Now, Tea publicans running for President and some media folks are saying it is time to move on from nasty politics. I say if you want to become President of the US of A give Americans full disclosure. Women need to know if you support unnecessary procedures like a transvaginal scope  … Yet; the same people accuse President Obama of withholding information from the public or being un-American get offended when asked to provide personal information.  We are their constituents; we all deserve to know how these people will vote on issues of religion, race, gender, and or abortion. The beliefs of members of Congress dictate to how the vote will affect our constitutional rights. If you were listening, for three years conservative politicians, some conservadems ramping up of vitriolic “family values” rhetoric pushing the discussion of women’s rights, religion, race and gender preference up to the surface to rile their base. It is obvious now that Republican Governors had a plan to take the rhetoric a step further by passing anti-abortion legislation all over the country in fact as stated by NWLC – “Ninety-two. That’s the number of anti-abortion measures passed into law across the U.S. in 2011. In addition, in case you are wondering, yes, that is a record — in fact; it is over 2.5 times the previous record. “

Bad enough that in this year 2013, we must continue to fight for women’s rights let alone safe affordable access to reproductive health care.  This is incredible since there are more female members of Congress, approximately 101, yes, mostly tea party members who say they are fiscally conservative, want less government in their (our) lives.  Yet, topics like abortion, stem cell research/experiments and religious freedom have them not just flustered but have their undies in a bunch about abortion funding and seem to be moving to have abortion outlawed altogether if possible. I could not vote for a woman who feels I am not qualified, mature enough or have no right to choose no matter what side of the political aisle they sit. The fact is women who choose an alternative option do so with trepidation not just because. The choice to have an abortion is not an easy one. Offering a safe procedure is better than having a woman desperate enough to take actions that could put her life at risk. The idea that any member of Congress would want to control a woman’s body is ludicrous at best. The Hyde – Amendment should be enough for folks on the right. It makes me want to scream hey, stay out of our lives.  We are in the 21st Century yet, the Tea publican ideology clearly keepabortionlegal

barbaric; spews old school dogma and not only cross the line, has it solidified a need a call for an unprecedented effort for a grassroots movement to keep our Democracy safe

If you live under a Republican controlled State and need or know someone in need of safe affordable healthcare with limited funds. Now, imagine the impact that repealing, replacing and eliminating access would have on ALL our families, friend’s co-workers. Let alone the idea that some Republicans want to go back to a time when women and people of colour had no rights; seen but  not heard and yes it sounds silly but before you laugh, take some time and listen to Tea publicans running for President closely.

Just when I thought we were all moving into the 21st century … sigh

12
Jun
13

No.More.Names


No More Names: The Drive to Reduce Gun Violence Friday marks six months since the mass shooting in Newtown, CT. It also marks six months of inaction from Congress.
That’s why we’re launching an ambitious, nationwide bus tour that will bring survivors and supporters directly to members of Congress across the country.
No More Names: The Drive to Reduce Gun Violence will visit 25 states in 100 days. We will stand in front of the local offices of members of Congress and read the names of Americans murdered with guns since Newtown, who number more than 5,000 and counting. They need to hear that every day they delay reform, more people will die.
Please make a donation of $33 or more to support the No More Names drive.
The drive begins this Friday, in Newtown. Mayors Against Illegal Guns is organizing a day of remembrance with family members of victims. We’re coming together to remember those who were lost at Sandy Hook Elementary, and to rally in support of reducing gun violence.
Every day, 33 people are murdered with guns in this country.
This past April, a minority of U.S. senators voted to block bipartisan legislation that would have saved lives by requiring criminal background checks for all commercial gun sales.
We can do better.
Your donation will go to convince our elected leaders that the time to fix our broken gun laws is now.
Please give $33 or more today to support No More Names: The Drive to Reduce Gun Violence:

http://act.demandaction.org/go/NoMoreNames

Thank you for your support,
Mark Glaze Mayors Against Illegal Guns
P.S. — If you are going to be in the Newtown area on Friday, please RSVP to join us for the day of remembrance.
10
Jun
13

The Equal Pay Act of 1963


Seal of the United States Equal Employment Opp...

Seal of the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

EDITOR’S NOTE: The following is the text of the Equal Pay Act of 1963 (Pub. L. 88-38) (EPA), as amended, as it appears in volume 29 of the United States Code, at section 206(d). The EPA, which is part of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, as amended (FLSA), and which is administered and enforced by the EEOC, prohibits sex-based wage discrimination between men and women in the same establishment who perform jobs that require substantially equal skill, effort and responsibility under similar working conditions. Cross references to the EPA as enacted appear in italics following the section heading. Additional provisions of the Equal Pay Act of 1963, as amended, are included as they appear in volume 29 of the United States Code.

MINIMUM WAGE

SEC. 206. [Section 6]

(d) Prohibition of sex discrimination

(1) No employer having employees subject to any provisions of this section shall discriminate, within any establishment in which such employees are employed, between employees on the basis of sex by paying wages to employees in such establishment at a rate less than the rate at which he pays wages to employees of the opposite sex in such establishment for equal work on jobs the performance of which requires equal skill, effort, and responsibility, and which are performed under similar working conditions, except where such payment is made pursuant to (i) a seniority system; (ii) a merit system; (iii) a system which measures earnings by quantity or quality of production; or (iv) a differential based on any other factor other than sex: Provided, That an employer who is paying a wage rate differential in violation of this subsection shall not, in order to comply with the provisions of this subsection, reduce the wage rate of any employee.

(2) No labor organization, or its agents, representing employees of an employer having employees subject to any provisions of this section shall cause or attempt to cause such an employer to discriminate against an employee in violation of paragraph (1) of this subsection.

(3) For purposes of administration and enforcement, any amounts owing to any employee which have been withheld in violation of this subsection shall be deemed to be unpaid minimum wages or unpaid overtime compensation under this chapter.

(4) As used in this subsection, the term “labor organization” means any organization of any kind, or any agency or employee representation committee or plan, in which employees participate and which exists for the purpose, in whole or in part, of dealing with employers concerning grievances, labor disputes, wages, rates of pay, hours of employment, or conditions of work.


ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS OF EQUAL PAY ACT OF 1963

An Act

To prohibit discrimination on account of sex in the payment of wages by employers engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That this Act may be cited as the “Equal Pay Act of 1963.”

***

DECLARATION OF PURPOSE

Not Reprinted in U.S. Code [Section 2]

(a) The Congress hereby finds that the existence in industries engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce of wage differentials based on sex-

(1) depresses wages and living standards for employees necessary for their health and efficiency;

(2) prevents the maximum utilization of the available labor

resources;

(3) tends to cause labor disputes, thereby burdening, affecting, and obstructing commerce;

(4) burdens commerce and the free flow of goods in commerce; and

(5) constitutes an unfair method of competition.

(b) It is hereby declared to be the policy of this Act, through exercise by Congress of its power to regulate commerce among the several States and with foreign nations, to correct the conditions above referred to in such industries.

[Section 3 of the Equal Pay Act of 1963 amends section 6 of the Fair Labor Standards Act by adding a new subsection (d). The amendment is incorporated in the revised text of the Fair Labor Standards Act.]

EFFECTIVE DATE

Not Reprinted in U.S. Code [Section 4]

The amendments made by this Act shall take effect upon the expiration of one year from the date of its enactment: Provided, That in the case of employees covered by a bona fide collective bargaining agreement in effect at least thirty days prior to the date of enactment of this Act entered into by a labor organization (as defined in section 6(d)(4) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, as amended) [subsection (d)(4) of this section], the amendments made by this Act shall take effect upon the termination of such collective bargaining agreement or upon the expiration of two years from the date of enactment of this Act, whichever shall first occur.

Approved June 10, 1963, 12 m.

[In the following excerpts from the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, as amended, authority given to the Secretary of Labor is exercised by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for purposes of enforcing the Equal Pay Act of 1963.]

ATTENDANCE OF WITNESSES

SEC. 209 [Section 9]

For the purpose of any hearing or investigation provided for in this chapter, the provisions of sections 49 and 50 of title 15 [Federal Trade Commission Act of September 16, 1914, as amended (U.S.C., 1934 edition)] (relating to the attendance of witnesses and the production of books, papers, and documents), are made applicable to the jurisdiction, powers, and duties of the Administrator, the Secretary of Labor, and the industry committees.

COLLECTION OF DATA

SEC. 211 [Section 11]

(a) Investigations and inspections

The Administrator or his designated representatives may investigate and gather data regarding the wages, hours, and other conditions and practices of employment in any industry subject to this chapter, and may enter and inspect such places and such records (and make such transcriptions thereof), question such employees, and investigate such facts, conditions, practices, or matters as he may deem necessary or appropriate to determine whether any person has violated any provision of this chapter, or which may aid in the enforcement of the provisions of this chapter. Except as provided in section 212 [section 12] of this title and in subsection (b) of this section, the Administrator shall utilize the bureaus and divisions of the Department of Labor for all the investigations and inspections necessary under this section. Except as provided in section 212 [section 12] of this title, the Administrator shall bring all actions under section 217 [section 17] of this title to restrain violations of this chapter.

(b) State and local agencies and employees

With the consent and cooperation of State agencies charged with the administration of State labor laws, the Administrator and the Secretary of Labor may, for the purpose of carrying out their respective functions and duties under this chapter, utilize the services of State and local agencies and their employees and, notwithstanding any other provision of law, may reimburse such State and local agencies and their employees for services rendered for such purposes.

(c) Records

Every employer subject to any provision of this chapter or of any order issued under this chapter shall make, keep, and preserve such records of the persons employed by him and of the wages, hours, and other conditions and practices of employment maintained by him, and shall preserve such records for such periods of time, and shall make such reports therefrom to the Administrator as he shall prescribe by regulation or order as necessary or appropriate for the enforcement of the provisions of this chapter or the regulations or orders thereunder. The employer of an employee who performs substitute work described in section 207(p)(3) [section 7(p)(3)] of this title may not be required under this subsection to keep a record of the hours of the substitute work.

(d) Homework regulations

The Administrator is authorized to make such regulations and orders regulating, restricting, or prohibiting industrial homework as are necessary or appropriate to prevent the circumvention or evasion of and to safeguard the minimum wage rate prescribed in this chapter, and all existing regulations or orders of the Administrator relating to industrial homework are continued in full force and effect.

EXEMPTIONS

SEC. 213 [Section 13]

(a) Minimum wage and maximum hour requirements

The provisions of sections 206 [section 6] (except subsection (d) in the case of paragraph (1) of this subsection) and section 207 [section 7] of this title shall not apply with respect to-

(1) any employee employed in a bona fide executive, administrative, or professional capacity (including any employee employed in the capacity of academic administrative personnel or teacher in elementary or secondary schools), or in the capacity of outside salesman (as such terms are defined and delimited from time to time by regulations of the Secretary, subject to the provisions of subchapter II of chapter 5 of Title 5 [the Administrative Procedure Act], except that an employee of a retail or service establishment shall not be excluded from the definition of employee employed in a bona fide executive or administrative capacity because of the number of hours in his workweek which he devotes to activities not directly or closely related to the performance of executive or administrative activities, if less than 40 per centum of his hours worked in the workweek are devoted to such activities); or

(2) [Repealed]

[Note: Section 13(a)(2) (relating to employees employed by a retail or service establishment) was repealed by Pub. L. 101-157, section 3(c)(1), November 17, 1989.]

(3) any employee employed by an establishment which is an amusement or recreational establishment, organized camp, or religious or non-profit educational conference center, if (A) it does not operate for more than seven months in any calendar year, or (B) during the preceding calendar year, its average receipts for any six months of such year were not more than 33 1/3 per centum of its average receipts for the other six months of such year, except that the exemption from sections 206 and 207 [sections 6 and 7] of this title provided by this paragraph does not apply with respect to any employee of a private entity engaged in providing services or facilities (other than, in the case of the exemption from section 206 [section 6] of this title, a private entity engaged in providing services and facilities directly related to skiing) in a national park or a national forest, or on land in the National Wildlife Refuge System, under a contract with the Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary of Agriculture; or

(4) [Repealed]

[Note: Section 13(a)(4) (relating to employees employed by an establishment which qualified as an exempt retail establishment) was repealed by Pub. L. 101-157, Section 3(c)(1), November 17, 1989.]

(5) any employee employed in the catching, taking, propagating, harvesting, cultivating, or farming of any kind of fish, shellfish, crustacea, sponges, seaweeds, or other aquatic forms of animal and vegetable life, or in the first processing, canning or packing such marine products at sea as an incident to, or in conjunction with, such fishing operations, including the going to and returning from work and loading and unloading when performed by any such employee; or

(6) any employee employed in agriculture (A) if such employee is employed by an employer who did not, during any calendar quarter during the preceding calendar year, use more than five hundred man-days of agricultural labor, (B) if such employee is the parent, spouse, child, or other member of his employer’s immediate family, (C) if such employee (i) is employed as a hand harvest laborer and is paid on a piece rate basis in an operation which has been, and is customarily and generally recognized as having been, paid on a piece rate basis in the region of employment, (ii) commutes daily from his permanent residence to the farm on which he is so employed, and (iii) has been employed in agriculture less than thirteen weeks during the preceding calendar year, (D) if such employee (other than an employee described in clause (C) of this subsection) (i) is sixteen years of age or under and is employed as a hand harvest laborer, is paid on a piece rate basis in an operation which has been, and is customarily and generally recognized as having been, paid on a piece rate basis in the region of employment, (ii) is employed on the same farm as his parent or person standing in the place of his parent, and (iii) is paid at the same piece rate as employees over age sixteen are paid on the same farm, or (E) if such employee is principally engaged in the range production of livestock; or

(7) any employee to the extent that such employee is exempted by regulations, order, or certificate of the Secretary issued under section 214 [section 14] of this title; or

(8) any employee employed in connection with the publication of any weekly, semiweekly, or daily newspaper with a circulation of less than four thousand the major part of which circulation is within the county where published or counties contiguous thereto; or

(9) [Repealed]

[Note: Section 13(a)(9) (relating to motion picture theater employees) was repealed by section 23 of the Fair Labor Standards Amendments of 1974. The 1974 amendments created an exemption for such employees from the overtime provisions only in section 13(b)27.]

(10) any switchboard operator employed by an independently owned public telephone company which has not more than seven hundred and fifty stations; or

(11) [Repealed]

[Note: Section 13(a)(11) (relating to telegraph agency employees) was repealed by section 10 of the Fair Labor Standards Amendments of 1974. The 1974 amendments created an exemption from the overtime provisions only in section 13(b)(23), which was repealed effective May 1, 1976.]

(12) any employee employed as a seaman on a vessel other than an American vessel; or

(13) [Repealed]

[Note: Section 13(a)(13) (relating to small logging crews) was repealed by section 23 of the Fair Labor Standards Amendments of 1974. The 1974 amendments created an exemption for such employees from the overtime provisions only in section 13(b)(28).]

(14) [Repealed]

[Note: Section 13(a)(14) (relating to employees employed in growing and harvesting of shade grown tobacco) was repealed by section 9 of the Fair Labor Standards Amendments of 1974. The 1974 amendments created an exemption for certain tobacco producing employees from the overtime provisions only in section 13(b)(22). The section 13(b)(22) exemption was repealed, effective January 1, 1978, by section 5 of the Fair Labor Standards Amendments of 1977.]

(15) any employee employed on a casual basis in domestic service employment to provide babysitting services or any employee employed in domestic service employment to provide companionship services for individuals who (because of age or infirmity) are unable to care for themselves (as such terms are defined and delimited by regulations of the Secretary); or

(16) a criminal investigator who is paid availability pay under section 5545a of Title 5 [Law Enforcement Availability Pay Act of 1994]; or

(17) any employee who is a computer systems analyst, computer programmer, software engineer, or other similarly skilled worker, whose primary duty is—

(A) the application of systems analysis techniques and procedures, including consulting with users, to determine hardware, software, or system functional specifications;

(B) the design, development, documentation, analysis, creation, testing, or modification of computer systems or programs, including prototypes, based on and related to user or system design specifications;

(C) the design, documentation, testing, creation, or modification of computer programs related to machine operating systems; or

(D) a combination of duties described in subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C) the performance of which requires the same level of skills, and

who, in the case of an employee who is compensated on an hourly basis, is compensated at a rate of not less than $27.63 an hour.

***

(g) Certain employment in retail or service establishments, agriculture

The exemption from section 206 [section 6] of this title provided by paragraph (6) of subsection (a) of this section shall not apply with respect to any employee employed by an establishment (1) which controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with, another establishment the activities of which are not related for a common business purpose to, but materially support the activities of the establishment employing such employee; and (2) whose annual gross volume of sales made or business done, when combined with the annual gross volume of sales made or business done by each establishment which controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with, the establishment employing such employee, exceeds $10,000,000 (exclusive of excise taxes at the retail level which are separately stated).

PROHIBITED ACTS

SEC. 215 [Section 15]

(a) After the expiration of one hundred and twenty days from June 25, 1938 [the date of enactment of this Act], it shall be unlawful for any person-

(1) to transport, offer for transportation, ship, deliver, or sell in commerce, or to ship, deliver, or sell with knowledge that shipment or delivery or sale thereof in commerce is intended, any goods in the production of which any employee was employed in violation of section 206 [section 6] or section 207 [section 7] of this title, or in violation of any regulation or order of the Secretary issued under section 214 [section 14] of this title, except that no provision of this chapter shall impose any liability upon any common carrier for the transportation in commerce in the regular course of its business of any goods not produced by such common carrier, and no provision of this chapter shall excuse any common carrier from its obligation to accept any goods for transportation; and except that any such transportation, offer, shipment, delivery, or sale of such goods by a purchaser who acquired them in good faith in reliance on written assurance from the producer that the goods were produced in compliance with the requirements of this chapter, and who acquired such goods for value without notice of any such violation, shall not be deemed unlawful;

(2) to violate any of the provisions of section 206 [section 6] or section 207 [section 7] of this title, or any of the provisions of any regulation or order of the Secretary issued under section 214 [section 14] of this title;

(3) to discharge or in any other manner discriminate against any employee because such employee has filed any complaint or instituted or caused to be instituted any proceeding under or related to this chapter, or has testified or is about to testify in any such proceeding, or has served or is about to serve on an industry committee;

(4) to violate any of the provisions of section 212 [section 12] of this title;

(5) to violate any of the provisions of section 211(c) [section 11(c)] of this title, or any regulation or order made or continued in effect under the provisions of section 211(d) [section 11(d)] of this title, or to make any statement, report, or record filed or kept pursuant to the provisions of such section or of any regulation or order thereunder, knowing such statement, report, or record to be false in a material respect.

(b) For the purposes of subsection (a)(1) of this section proof that any employee was employed in any place of employment where goods shipped or sold in commerce were produced, within ninety days prior to the removal of the goods from such place of employment, shall be prima facie evidence that such employee was engaged in the production of such goods.

PENALTIES

SEC. 216 [Section 16]

(a) Fines and imprisonment

Any person who willfully violates any of the provisions of section 215 [section 15] of this title shall upon conviction thereof be subject to a fine of not more than $10,000, or to imprisonment for not more than six months, or both. No person shall be imprisoned under this subsection except for an offense committed after the conviction of such person for a prior offense under this subsection.

(b) Damages; right of action; attorney’s fees and costs; termination of right of action

Any employer who violates the provisions of section 206 [section 6] or section 207 [section 7] of this title shall be liable to the employee or employees affected in the amount of their unpaid minimum wages, or their unpaid overtime compensation, as the case may be, and in an additional equal amount as liquidated damages. Any employer who violates the provisions of section 215(a)(3) [section 15(a)(3)] of this title shall be liable for such legal or equitable relief as may be appropriate to effectuate the purposes of section 215(a)(3) [section 15(a)(3)] of this title, including without limitation employment, reinstatement,promotion, and the payment of wages lost and an additional equal amount as liquidated damages. An action to recover the liability prescribed in either of the preceding sentences may be maintained against any employer (including a public agency) in any Federal or State court of competent jurisdiction by any one or more employees for and in behalf of himself or themselves and other employees similarly situated. No employee shall be a party plaintiff to any such action unless he gives his consent in writing to become such a party and such consent is filed in the court in which such action is brought. The court in such action shall, in addition to any judgment awarded to the plaintiff or plaintiffs, allow a reasonable attorney’s fee to be paid by the defendant, and costs of the action. The right provided by this subsection to bring an action by or on behalf of any employee, and the right of any employee to become a party plaintiff to any such action, shall terminate upon the filing of a complaint by the Secretary of Labor in an action under section 217 [section 17] of this title in which (1) restraint is sought of any further delay in the payment of unpaid minimum wages, or the amount of unpaid overtime compensation, as the case may be, owing to such employee under section 206 [section 6] or section 207 [section 7] of this title by an employer liable therefor[sic] under the provisions of this subsection or (2) legal or equitable relief is sought as a result of alleged violations of section 215(a)(3) [section 15(a)(3)] of this title.

(c) Payment of wages and compensation; waiver of claims; actions by the Secretary; limitation of actions

The Secretary is authorized to supervise the payment of the unpaid minimum wages or the unpaid overtime compensation owing to any employee or employees under section 206 [section 6] or section 207 [section 7] of this title, and the agreement of any employee to accept such payment shall upon payment in full constitute a waiver by such employee of any right he may have under subsection (b) of this section to such unpaid minimum wages or unpaid overtime compensation and an additional equal amount as liquidated damages. The Secretary may bring an action in any court of competent jurisdiction to recover the amount of the unpaid minimum wages or overtime compensation and an equal amount as liquidated damages. The right provided by subsection (b) of this section to bring an action by or on behalf of any employee to recover the liability specified in the first sentence of such subsection and of any employee to become a party plaintiff to any such action shall terminate upon the filing of a complaint by the Secretary in an action under this subsection in which a recovery is sought of unpaid minimum wages or unpaid overtime compensation under sections 206 and 207 [sections 6 and 7] of this title or liquidated or other damages provided by this subsection owing to such employee by an employer liable under the provisions of subsection (b) of this section, unless such action is dismissed without prejudice on motion of the Secretary. Any sums thus recovered by the Secretary of Labor on behalf of an employee pursuant to this subsection shall be held in a special deposit account and shall be paid, on order of the Secretary of Labor, directly to the employee or employees affected. Any such sums not paid to an employee because of inability to do so within a period of three years shall be covered into the Treasury of the United States as miscellaneous receipts. In determining when an action is commenced by the Secretary of Labor under this subsection for the purposes of the statutes of limitations provided in section 255(a) of this title [section 6(a) of the Portal-to-Portal Act of 1947], it shall be considered to be commenced in the case of any individual claimant on the date when the complaint is filed if he is specifically named as a party plaintiff in the complaint, or if his name did not so appear, on the subsequent date on which his name is added as a party plaintiff in such action.

(d) Savings provisions

In any action or proceeding commenced prior to, on, or after August 8, 1956 [the date of enactment of this subsection], no employer shall be subject to any liability or punishment under this chapter or the Portal-to-Portal Act of 1947 [29 U.S.C. 251 et seq.] on account of his failure to comply with any provision or provisions of this chapter or such Act (1) with respect to work heretofore or hereafter performed in a workplace to which the exemption in section 213(f) [section 13(f)] of this title is applicable, (2) with respect to work performed in Guam, the Canal Zone or Wake Island before the effective date of this amendment of subsection (d), or (3) with respect to work performed in a possession named in section 206(a)(3) [section 6(a)(3)] of this title at any time prior to the establishment by the Secretary, as provided therein, of a minimum wage rate applicable to such work.

(e)(1)(A) Any person who violates the provisions of sections 212 or 213(c) [sections 12 or 13(c)] of this title, relating to child labor, or any regulation issued pursuant to such sections, shall be subject to a civil penalty of not to exceed—

(i) $11,000 for each employee who was the subject of such a violation; or

(ii) $50,000 with regard to each such violation that causes the death or serious injury of any employee under the age of 18 years, which penalty may be doubled where the violation is a repeated or willful violation.

(B) For purposes of subparagraph (A), the term “serious injury” means—

(i) permanent loss or substantial impairment of one of the senses (sight, hearing, taste, smell, tactile sensation);

(ii) permanent loss or substantial impairment of the function of a bodily member, organ, or mental faculty, including the loss of all or part of an arm, leg, foot, hand or other body part; or

(iii) permanent paralysis or substantial impairment that causes loss of movement or mobility of an arm, leg, foot, hand or other body part.

(2) Any person who repeatedly or willfully violates section 206 or 207 [section 6 or 7], relating to wages, shall be subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $1,100 for each such violation.

(3) In determining the amount of any penalty under this subsection, the appropriateness of such penalty to the size of the business of the person charged and the gravity of the violation shall be considered. The amount of any penalty under this subsection, when finally determined, may be-

(A) deducted from any sums owing by the United States to the person charged;

(B) recovered in a civil action brought by the Secretary in any court of competent jurisdiction, in which litigation the Secretary shall be represented by the Solicitor of Labor; or

(C) ordered by the court, in an action brought for a violation of section 215(a)(4) [section 15(a)(4)] of this title or a repeated or willful violation of section 215(a)(2) [section 15(a)(2)] of this title, to be paid to the Secretary.

(4) Any administrative determination by the Secretary of the amount of any penalty under this subsection shall be final, unless within 15 days after receipt of notice thereof by certified mail the person charged with the violation takes exception to the determination that the violations for which the penalty is imposed occurred, in which event final determination of the penalty shall be made in an administrative proceeding after opportunity for hearing in accordance with section 554 of Title 5 [Administrative Procedure Act], and regulations to be promulgated by the Secretary.

(5) Except for civil penalties collected for violations of section 212 [section 12] of this title, sums collected as penalties pursuant to this section shall be applied toward reimbursement of the costs of determining the violations and assessing and collecting such penalties, in accordance with the provision of section 9a of Title 29 [An Act to authorize the Department of Labor to make special statistical studies upon payment of the cost thereof and for other purposes]. Civil penalties collected for violations of section 212 [section 12] of this title shall be deposited in the general fund of the Treasury.

INJUNCTION PROCEEDINGS

SEC. 217 [Section 17]

The districts courts, together with the United States District Court for the District of the Canal Zone, the District Court of the Virgin Islands, and the District Court of Guam shall have jurisdiction, for cause shown, to restrain violations of section 215 [section 15] of this title, including in the case of violations of section 215(a)(2) of this title the restraint of any withholding of payment of minimum wages or overtime compensation found by the court to be due to employees under this chapter (except sums which employees are barred from recovering, at the time of the commencement of the action to restrain the violations, by virtue of the provisions of section 255 of this title [section 6 of the Portal-to-Portal Act of 1947].

RELATION TO OTHER LAWS

SEC. 218 [Section 18]

(a) No provision of this chapter or of any order thereunder shall

excuse noncompliance with any Federal or State law or municipal ordinance establishing a minimum wage higher than the minimum wage established under this chapter or a maximum work week lower than the maximum workweek established under this chapter, and no provision of this chapter relating to the employment of child labor shall justify noncompliance with any Federal or State law or municipal ordinance establishing a higher standard than the standard established under this chapter. No provision of this chapter shall justify any employer in reducing a wage paid by him which is in excess of the applicable minimum wage under this chapter, or justify any employer in increasing hours of employment maintained by him which are shorter than the maximum hours applicable under this chapter.

SEPARABILITY OF PROVISIONS

SEC. 219 [Section 19]

If any provision of this chapter or the application of such provision to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of this chapter and the application of such provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby.

Approved June 25, 1938.

[In the following excerpts from the Portal-to-Portal Act of 1947, the authority given to the Secretary of Labor is exercised by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for purposes of enforcing the Equal Pay Act of 1963.]

PART IV – MISCELLANEOUS

STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS

SEC. 255 [Section 6]

Any action commenced on or after May 14, 1947 [the date of the enactment of this Act], to enforce any cause of action for unpaid minimum wages, unpaid overtime compensation, or liquidated damages, under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, as amended, [29 U.S.C. 201 et seq.], the Walsh-Healey Act [41 U.S.C. 35 et seq.], or the Bacon-Davis Act [40 U.S.C. 276a et seq.]-

(a) if the cause of action accrues on or after May 14, 1947 [the date of the enactment of this Act]-may be commenced within two years after the cause of action accrued, and every such action shall be forever barred unless commenced within two years after the cause of action accrued,except that a cause of action arising out of a willful violation may be commenced within three years after the cause of action accrued;

DETERMINATION OF COMMENCEMENT OF FUTURE ACTIONS

SEC. 256 [Section 7]

In determining when an action is commenced for the purposes of section 255 [section 6] of this title, an action commenced on or after May 14, 1947 [the date of the enactment of this Act] under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, as amended, [29 U.S.C. 201 et seq.], the Walsh-Healey Act [41 U.S.C. 35 et seq.], or the Bacon-Davis Act [40 U.S.C. 276a et seq.], shall be considered to be commenced on the date when the complaint is filed; except that in the case of a collective or class action instituted under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, as amended, or the Bacon-Davis Act, it shall be considered to be commenced in the case of any individual claimant—

(a) on the date when the complaint is filed, if he is specifically named as a party plaintiff in the complaint and his written consent to become a party plaintiff is filed on such date in the court in which the action is brought; or

(b) if such written consent was not so filed or if his name did not so appear—on the subsequent date on which such written consent is filed in the court in which the action was commenced.

RELIANCE IN FUTURE ON ADMINISTRATIVE RULINGS, ETC.

SEC. 259 [Section 10]

(a) In any action or proceeding based on any act or omission on or after May 14, 1947 [the date of the enactment of this Act], no employer shall be subject to any liability or punishment for or on account of the failure of the employer to pay minimum wages or overtime compensation under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, as amended, [29 U.S.C. 201 et seq.], the Walsh-Healey Act [41 U.S.C. 35 et seq.], or the Bacon-Davis Act [40 U.S.C. 276a et seq.], if he pleads and proves that the act or omission complained of was in good faith in conformity with and in reliance on any written administrative regulation, order, ruling, approval, or interpretation, of the agency of the United States specified in subsection (b) of this section, or any administrative practice or enforcement policy of such agency with respect to the class of employers to which he belonged. Such a defense, if established, shall be a bar to the action or proceeding, notwithstanding that after such act or omission, such administrative regulation, order, ruling, approval, interpretation, practice, or enforcement policy is modified or rescinded or is determined by judicial authority to be invalid or of no legal effect.

(b) The agency referred to in subsection (a) shall be-

(1) in the case of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, as amended [29 U.S.C. 201 et seq.]- the Administrator of the Wage and Hour Division of the Department of Labor;

LIQUIDATED DAMAGES

SEC. 260 [Section 11]

In any action commenced prior to or on or after May 14, 1947 [the date of the enactment of this Act] to recover unpaid minimum wages, unpaid overtime compensation, or liquidated damages, under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, as amended [29 U.S.C. 201 et seq.], if the employer shows to the satisfaction of the court that the act or omission giving rise to such action was in good faith and that he had reasonable grounds for believing that his act or omission was not a violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, as amended [29 U.S.C. 201 et seq.],the court may, in its sound discretion, award no liquidated damages or award any amount thereof not to exceed the amount specified in section 216 [section 16] of this title.

DEFINITIONS

SEC. 262 [Section 13]

(a) When the terms “employer”, “employee”, and “wage” are used in this chapter in relation to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, as amended [29 U.S.C. 201 et seq.], they shall have the same meaning as when used in such Act of 1938.

SEPARABILITY

Not Reprinted in U.S. Code [Section 14]

If any provision of this Act or the application of such provision to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of this Act and the application of such provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby.

SHORT TITLE

Not Reprinted in U.S. Code [Section 15]

This Act may be cited as the ‘Portal-to-Portal Act of 1947.’

Approved May 14, 1947.




~ politics~ pop culture & petitions ~

June 2013
M T W T F S S
« May    
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930

~ TWITTER ~

Error: Twitter did not respond. Please wait a few minutes and refresh this page.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,984 other followers

%d bloggers like this: