(a) Section 4 of the Portal Act does not affect the computation of hours worked within the ``workday'' proper, roughly described as the period ``from whistle to whistle,'' and its provisions have nothing to do with the compensability under the Fair Labor Standards Act of any activities engaged in by an employee during that period. \34\ Under the provisions of section 4, one of the conditions that must be present before ``preliminary'' or ``postliminary'' activities are excluded from hours worked is that they `occur either prior to the time on any particular workday at which the employee commences, or subsequent to the time on any particular workday at which he ceases' the principal activity or activities which he is employed to perform. Accordingly, to the extent that activities engaged in by an employee occur after the employee commences to perform the first principal activity on a particular workday and before he ceases the performance of the last principal activity on a particular workday, the provisions of that section have no application. Periods of time between the commencement of the employee's first principal activity and the completion of his last principal activity on any workday must be included in the computation of hours worked to the same extent as would be required if the Portal Act had not been enacted. \35\ The principles for determining hours worked within the ``workday'' proper will continue to be those established under the Fair Labor Standards Act without reference to the Portal Act, \36\ which is concerned with this question only as it relates to time spent outside the ``workday'' in activities of the kind described in section 4. \37\---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ The report of the Senate Judiciary Committee states (p. 47), ``Activities of an employee which take place during the workday are * * * not affected by this section (section 4 of the Portal-to-Portal Act, as finally enacted) and such activities will continue to be compensable or not without regard to the provisions of this section.''
\35\ See Senate Report, pp. 47, 48; Conference Report, p. 12; statement of Senator Wiley, explaining the conference agreement to the Senate, 93 Cong. Rec. 4269 (also 2084, 2085); statement of Representative Gwynne, explaining the conference agreement to the House of Representatives, 93 Cong. Rec. 4388; statements of Senator Cooper, 93 Cong. Rec. 2293-2294, 2296-2300; statements of Senator Donnell, 93 Cong. Rec. 2181, 2182, 2362.
\36\ The determinations of hours worked under the Fair Labor Standards Act, as amended is discussed in part 785 of this chapter.
\37\ See statement of Senator Wiley explaining the conference agreement to the Senate, 93 Cong. Rec. 3269. See also the discussion in Sec. Sec. 790.7 and 790.8.---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) ``Workday'' as used in the Portal Act means, in general, the period between the commencement and completion on the same workday of an employee's principal activity or activities. It includes all time within that period whether or not the employee engages in work throughout all of that period. For example, a rest period or a lunch period is part of the ``workday'', and section 4 of the Portal Act therefore plays no part in determining whether such a period, under the particular circumstances presented, is or is not compensable, or whether it should be included in the computation of hours worked. \38\ If an employee is required to report at the actual place of performance of his principal activity at a certain specific time, his ``workday'' commences at the time he reports there for work in accordance with the employer's requirement, even though through a cause beyond the employee's control, he is not able to commence performance of his productive activities until a later time. In such a situation the time spent waiting for work would be part of the workday, \39\ and section 4 of the Portal Act would not affect its inclusion in hours worked for purposes of the Fair Labor Standards Act.---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ Senate Report, pp. 47, 48. Cf. statement of Senator Wiley explaining the conference agreement to the Senate, 93 Cong. Rec. 4269; statement of Senator Donnell, 93 Cong. Rec. 2362; statements of Senator Cooper, 93 Cong. Rec. 2297, 2298.
\39\ Colloquy between Senators Cooper and McGrath, 93 Cong. Rec. 2297, 2298. [12 FR 7655, Nov. 18, 1947, as amended at 35 FR 7383, May 12, 1970] Sec. 790.7 ``Preliminary'' and ``postliminary'' activities.
(a) Since section 4 of the Portal Act applies only to situations where employees engage in ``preliminary'' or ``postliminary'' activities outside the workday proper, it is necessary to consider what activities fall within this description. The fact that an employee devotes some of his time to an activity of this type is, however, not a sufficient reason for disregarding the time devoted to such activity in computing hours worked. If such time would otherwise be counted as time worked under the Fair Labor Standards Act, section 4 may not change the situation. Whether such time must be counted or may be disregarded, and whether the relief from liability or punishment afforded by section 4 of the Portal Act is available to the employer in such a situation will depend on the compensability of the activity under contract, custom, or practice within the meaning of that section. \40\ On the other hand, the criteria described in the Portal Act have no bearing on the compensability or the status as worktime under the Fair Labor Standards Act of activities that are not ``preliminary'' or ``postliminary'' activities outside the workday. \41\ And even where there is a contract, custom, or practice to pay for time spent in such a ``preliminary'' or ``postliminary'' activity, section 4(d) of the Portal Act does not make such time hours worked under the Fair Labor Standards Act, if it would not be so counted under the latter Act alone. \42\---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\40\ See Conference Report. pp. 10, 12, 13; statements of Senator Donnell, 93 Cong. Rec. 2178-2179, 2181, 2182; statements of Senator Cooper, 93 Cong. Rec. 2297, 2298. See also Sec. Sec. 790.4 and 790.5.
\41\ See Conference Report, p. 12; Senate Report, pp. 47, 48; statement of Senator Wiley, explaining the conference agreement to the Senate, 93 Cong. Rec. 4269; statement of Representative Gwynne, explaining the conference agreement to the House of Representatives, 93 Cong. Rec. 4388. See also Sec. 790.6.
\42\ See Sec. 790.5(a).---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) The words ``preliminary activity'' mean an activity engaged in by an employee before the commencement of his ``principal'' activity or activities, and the words ``postliminary activity'' means an activity engaged in by an employee after the completion of his ``principal'' activity or activities. No categorical list of ``preliminary'' and ``postliminary'' activities except those named in the Act can be made, since activities which under one set of circumstances may be ``preliminary'' or ``postliminary'' activities, may under other conditions be ``principal'' activities. The following ``preliminary'' or ``postliminary'' activities are expressly mentioned in the Act: ``Walking, riding, or traveling to or from the actual place of performance of the principal activity or activities which (the) employee is employed to perform.'' \43\---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ Portal Act, subsections 4(a), 4(d). See also Conference Report, p. 13; statement of Senator Donnell, 93 Cong. Rec. 2181, 2362.---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(c) The statutory language and the legislative history indicate that the ``walking, riding or traveling'' to which section 4(a) refers is that which occurs, whether on or off the employer's premises, in the course of an employee's ordinary daily trips between his home or lodging and the actual place where he does what he is employed to do. It does not, however, include travel from the place of performance of one principal activity to the place of performance of another, nor does it include travel during the employee's regular working hours. \44\ For example, travel by a repairman from one place where he performs repair work to another such place, or travel by a messenger delivering messages, is not the kind of ``walking, riding or traveling'' described in section 4(a). Also, where an employee travels outside his regular working hours at the direction and on the business of his employer, the travel would not ordinarily be ``walking, riding, or traveling'' of the type referred to in section 4(a). One example would be a traveling employee whose duties require him to travel from town to town outside his regular working hours; another would be an employee who has gone home after completing his day's work but is subsequently called out at night to travel a substantial distance and perform an emergency job for one of his employer's customers. \45\ In situations such as these, where an employee's travel is not of the kind to which section 4(a) of the Portal Act refers, the question whether the travel time is to be counted as worktime under the Fair Labor Standards Act will continue to be determined by principles established under this Act, without reference to the Portal Act. \46\---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ These conclusions are supported by the limitation, ``to and from the actual place of performance of the principal activity or activities which (the) employee is employed to perform,'' which follows the term ``walking, riding or traveling'' in section 4(a), and by the additional limitation applicable to all ``preliminary'' and ``postliminary'' activities to the effect that the Act may affect them only if they occur ``prior to'' or ``subsequent to'' the workday. See, in this connection the statements of Senator Donnell, 93 Conf. Rec. 2121, 2181, 2182, 2363; statement of Senator Cooper, 93 Cong. Rec. 2297. See also Senate Report, pp. 47, 48.
\45\ The report of the Senate Judiciary Committee (p. 48) emphasized that this section of the Act ``does not attempt to cover by specific language that many thousands of situations that do not readily fall within the pattern of the ordinary workday.''
\46\ These principles are discussed in part 785 of this chapter.---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(d) An employee who walks, rides or otherwide travels while performing active duties is not engaged in the activities described in section 4(a). An illustration of such travel would be the carrying by a logger of a portable power saw or other heavy equipment (as distinguished from ordinary hand tools) on his trip into the woods to the cutting area. In such a situation, the walking, riding, or traveling is not segreable from the simultaneous performance of his assigned work (the carrying of the equipment, etc.) and it does not constitute travel ``to and from the actual place of performance'' of the principal activities he is employed to perform. \47\---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\47\ Senator Cooper, after explaining that the ``principal'' activities referred to include activities which are an integral part of a ``principal'' activity (Senate Report, pp. 47, 48), that is, those which ``are indispensable to the performance of the productive work,'' summarized this provision as it appeared in the Senate Bill by stating: ``We have clearly eliminated from compensation walking, traveling, riding, and other activities which are not an integral part of the employment for which the worker is employer.'' 93 Cong. Rec. 2299.---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(e) The report of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary (p. 47) describes the travel affected by the statute as ``Walking, riding, or traveling to and from the actual place of performance of the principal activity or activities within the employer's plant, mine, building, or other place of employment, irrespective of whether such walking, riding, or traveling occur on or off the premises of the employer or before or after the employee has checked in or out.'' The phrase, actual place of performance,'' as used in section 4(a), thus emphasizes that the ordinary travel at the beginning and end of the workday to which this section relates includes the employee's travel on the employer's premises until he reaches his workbench or other place where he commences the performance of the principal activity or activities, and the return travel from that place at the end of the workday. However where an employee performs his principal activity at various places (common examples would be a telephone lineman, a ``trouble-shooter'' in a manufacturing plant, a meter reader, or an exterminator) the travel between those places is not travel of the nature described in this section, and the Portal Act has not significance in determining whether the travel time should be counted as time worked.
(f) Examples of walking, riding, or traveling which may be performed outside the workday and would normally be considered ``preliminary'' or ``postliminary'' activities are (1) walking or riding by an employee between the plant gate and the employee's lathe, workbench or other actual place of performance of his principal activity or activities; (2) riding on buses between a town and an outlying mine or factory where the employee is employed; and (3) riding on buses or trains from a logging camp to a particular site at which the logging operations are actually being conducted. \48\---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\48\ See Senate Report, p. 47; statements of Senator Donnell, 93 Cong. Rec. 2121, 2182, 3263.---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(g) Other types of activities which may be performed outside the workday and, when performed under the conditions normally present, would be considered ``preliminary'' or ``postliminary'' activities, include checking in and out and waiting in line to do so, changing clothes, washing up or showering, and waiting in line to receive pay checks. \49\---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\49\ See Senate Report p. 47. Washing up after work, like the changing of clothes, may in certain situations be so directly related to the specific work the employee is employed to perform that it would be regarded as an integral part of the employee's ``principal activity''. See colloquy between Senators Cooper and McGrath, 93 Cong. Rec. 2297-2298. See also paragraph (h) of this section and Sec. 790.8(c). This does not necessarily mean, however, that travel between the washroom or clothes-changing place and the actual place of performance of the specific work the employee is employed to perform, would be excluded from the type of travel to which section 4(a) refers.---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(h) As indicated above, an activity which is a ``preliminary'' or ``postliminary'' activity under one set of circumstances may be a principal activity under other conditions. \50\ This may be illustrated by the following example: Waiting before the time established for the commencement of work would be regarded as a preliminary activity when the employee voluntarily arrives at his place of employment earlier than he is either required or expected to arrive. Where, however, an employee is required by his employer to report at a particular hour at his workbench or other place where he performs his principal activity, if the employee is there at that hour ready and willing to work but for some reason beyond his control there is no work for him to perform until some time has elapsed, waiting for work would be an integral part of the employee's principal activities. \51\ The difference in the two situations is that in the second the employee was engaged to wait while in the first the employee waited to be engaged. \52\---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\50\ See paragraph (b) of this section. See also footnote 49.
\51\ Colloquy between Senators Cooper and McGrath, 93 Cong. Rec. 2298.
\52\ See Skidmore v. Swift & Co., 323 U.S. 134, 7 WHR 1165. [12 FR 7655, Nov. 18, 1947, as amended at 35 FR 7383, May 12, 1970] Sec. 790.8 ``Principal'' activities.
(a) An employer's liabilities and obligations under the Fair Labor Standards Act with respect to the ``principal'' activities his employees are employed to perform are not changed in any way by section 4 of the Portal Act, and time devoted to such activities must be taken into account in computing hours worked to the same extent as it would if the Portal Act had not been enacted. \53\ But before it can be determined whether an activity is ``preliminary or postliminary to (the) principal activity or activities'' which the employee is employed to perform, it is generally necessary to determine what are such ``principal'' activities. \54\---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\53\ See Sec. Sec. 790.4 through 790.6 of this bulletin and part 785 of this chapter, which discusses the principles for determining hours worked under the Fair Labor Standards Act, as amended.
\54\ Although certain ``preliminary'' and ``postliminary'' activities are expressly mentioned in the statute (see Sec. 790.7(b)), they are described with reference to the place where principal activities are performed. Even as to these activities, therefore, identification of certain other activities as ``principal'' activities is necessary. The use by Congress of the plural form ``activities'' in the statute makes it clear that in order for an activity to be a ``principal'' activity, it need not be predominant in some way over all other activities engaged in by the employee in performing his job; \55\ rather, an employee may, for purposes of the Portal-to-Portal Act be engaged in several ``principal'' activities during the workday. The ``principal'' activities referred to in the statute are activities which the employee is ``employed to perform''; \56\ they do not include noncompensable ``walking, riding, or traveling'' of the type referred to in section 4 of the Act. \57\ Several guides to determine what constitute ``principal activities'' was suggested in the legislative debates. One of the members of the conference committee stated to the House of Representatives that ``the realities of industrial life,'' rather than arbitrary standards, ``are intended to be applied in defining the term `principal activity or activities','' and that these words should ``be interpreted with due regard to generally established compensation practices in the particular industry and trade.'' \58\ The legislative history further indicates that Congress intended the words ``principal activities'' to be construed liberally in the light of the foregoing principles to include any work of consequence performed for an employer, no matter when the work is performed. \59\ A majority member of the committee which introduced this language into the bill explained to the Senate that it was considered ``sufficiently broad to embrace within its terms such activities as are indispensable to the performance of productive work.'' \60\---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\55\ Cf. Edward F. Allison Co., Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 63 F. (2d) 553 (C.C.A. 8, 1933).
\56\ Cf. Armour & Co. v. Wantock, 323 U.S. 126, 132-134; Skidmore v. Swift & Co., 323 U.S. 134, 136-137.
\57\ See statement of Senator Cooper, 93 Cong. Rec. 2297.
\58\ Remarks of Representative Walter, 93 Cong. Rec. 4389. See also statements of Senator Cooper, 93 Cong. Rec. 2297, 2299.
\59\ See statements of Senator Cooper, 93 Cong. Rec. 2296-2300. See also Senate Report, p. 48, and the President's message to Congress on approval of the Portal Act, May 14, 1947 (93 Cong. Rec. 5281).
\60\ See statement of Senator Cooper, 93 Cong. Rec. 2299.---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) The term ``principal activities'' includes all activities which are an integral part of a principal activity. \61\ Two examples of what is meant by an integral part of a principal activity are found in the Report of the Judiciary Committee of the Senate on the Portal-to-Portal Bill. \62\ They are the following:---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\61\ Senate Report, p. 48; statements of Senator Cooper, 93 Cong. Rec. 2297-2299.
\62\ As stated in the Conference Report (p. 12), by Representative Gwynne in the House of Representatives (93 Cong. Rec. 4388) and by Senator Wiley in the Senate (93 Cong. Rec. 4371), the language of the provision here involved follows that of the Senate bill.---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) In connection with the operation of a lathe an employee will frequently at the commencement of his workday oil, grease or clean his machine, or install a new cutting tool. Such activities are an integral part of the principal activity, and are included within such term.
(2) In the case of a garment worker in a textile mill, who is required to report 30 minutes before other employees report to commence their principal activities, and who during such 30 minutes distributes clothing or parts of clothing at the work-benches of other employees and gets machines in readiness for operation by other employees, such activities are among the principal activities of such employee. Such preparatory activities, which the Administrator has always regarded as work and as compensable under the Fair Labor Standards Act, remain so under the Portal Act, regardless of contrary custom or contract. \63\---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\63\ Statement of Senator Cooper, 93 Cong. Rec. 2297; colloquy between Senators Barkley and Cooper, 93 Cong. Rec. 2350. The fact that a period of 30 minutes was mentioned in the second example given by the committee does not mean that a different rule would apply where such preparatory activities take less time to perform. In a colloquy between Senators McGrath and Cooper, 93 Cong. Rec. 2298, Senator Cooper stated that ``There was no definite purpose in using the words `30 minutes' instead of 15 or 10 minutes or 5 minutes or any other number of minutes.'' In reply to questions, he indicated that any amount of time spent in preparatory activities of the types referred to in the examples would be regarded as a part of the employee's principal activity and within the compensable workday. Cf. Anderson v. Mt. Clemens Pottery Co., 328 U.S. 680, 693.---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(c) Among the activities included as an integral part of a principal activity are those closely related activities which are indispensable to its performance. \64\ If an employee in a chemical plant, for example, cannot perform his principal activities without putting on certain clothes, \65\ changing clothes on the employer's premises at the beginning and end of the workday would be an integral part of the employee's principal activity. \66\ On the other hand, if changing clothes is merely a convenience to the employee and not directly related to his principal activities, it would be considered as a ``preliminary'' or ``postliminary'' activity rather than a principal part of the activity. \67\ However, activities such as checking in and out and waiting in line to do so would not ordinarily be regarded as integral parts of the principal activity or activities. \67\---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\64\ See statements of Senator Cooper, 93 Cong. Rec. 2297-2299, 2377; colloquy between Senators Barkley and Cooper, 93 Cong. Rec. 2350.
\65\ Such a situation may exist where the changing of clothes on the employer's premises is required by law, by rules of the employer, or by the nature of the work. See footnote 49.
\66\ See colloquy between Senators Cooper and McGrath, 93 Cong. Rec. 2297-2298.
\67\ See Senate Report, p. 47; statements of Senator Donnell, 93 Cong. Rec. 2305-2306, 2362; statements of Senator Cooper, 93 Cong. Rec. 2296-2297, 2298. [12 FR 7655, Nov. 18, 1947, as amended at 35 FR 7383, May 12, 1970] Sec. 790.9 ``Compensable * * * by an express provision of a written or nonwritten contract.''
(a) Where an employee engages in a ``preliminary'' or ``postliminary'' activity of the kind described in section 4(a) of the Portal Act and this activity is ``compensable * * * by an express provision of a written or nonwritten contract'' applicable to the employment, section 4 does not operate to relieve the employer of liability or punishment under the Fair Labor Standards Act with respect to such activity, \68\ and does not relieve the employer of any obligation he would otherwise have under that Act to include time spent in such activity in computing hours worked. \69\---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\68\ See Sec. 790.4.
\69\ See Sec. Sec. 790.5 and 790.7.---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) The word ``compensable,'' is used in subsections (b), (c), and (d) of section 4 without qualification. \70\ It is apparent from these provisions that ``compensable'' as used in the statute, means compensable in any amount. \71\---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\70\ The word is also so used throughout section 2 of the Act which relates to past claims. See Sec. Sec. 790.28-790.25.
\71\ Cf. Conference Report, pp. 9, 10, 12, 13; message of the President to the Congress on approval of the Portal-to-Portal Act, May 14, 1947 (93 Cong. Rec. 5281).---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(c) The phrase ``compensable by an express provision of a written or non- written contract'' in section 4(b) of the Portal Act offers no difficulty where a written contract states that compensation shall be paid for the specific activities in question, naming them in explicit terms or identifying them through any appropriate language. Such a provision clearly falls within the statutory description. \72\ The existence or nonexistence of an express provision making an activity compensable is more difficult to determine in the case of a nonwritten contract since there may well be conflicting recollections as to the exact terms of the agreement. The words ``compensable by an express provision'' indicate that both the intent of the parties to contract with respect to the activity in question and their intent to provide compensation for the employee's performance of the activity must satisfactorily appear from the express terms of the agreement.---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\72\ See colloquy between Senators Donnell and Lodge, 93 Cong. Rec. 2178; colloquies between Senators Donnell and Hawkes, 93 Cong. Rec. 2179, 2181-2182.---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(d) An activity of an employee is not ``compensable by * * * a written or nonwritten contract'' within the meaning of section 4(b) of the Portal Act unless the contract making the activity compensable is one ``between such employee, \72\ his agent, or collective-bargaining representative and his employer.'' \73\ Thus, a provision in a contract between a government agency and the employer, relating to compensation of the contractor's employees, would not in itself establish the compensability by ``contract'' of an activity, for purposes of section 4.---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\73\ The terms ``employee'' and ``employer'' have the same meaning as when used in the Fair Labor Standards Act. Portal-to-Portal Act, section 13(a).--------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sec. 790.10 ``Compensable * * * by a custom or practice.''
(a) A ``preliminary'' or ``postliminary'' activity of the type described in section 4(a) of the Portal Act may be ``compensable'' within the meaning of section 4(b), by a custom or practice as well as by a contract. If it is so compensable, the relief afforded by section 4 is not available to the employer with respect to such activity, \74\ and section 4(d) does not operate to exclude the time spent in such activity from hours worked under the Fair Labor Standards Act. \75\ Accordingly, in the event that no ``express provision of a written or nonwritten contract'' makes compensable the activity in question, it is necessary to determine whether the activity is made compensable by a custom or practice, not inconsistent with such a contract, in effect at the establishment or other place where the employee was employed. \76\---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\74\ See Sec. 790.4.
\75\ See Sec. Sec. 790.5 and 790.7.
\76\ See Senate Report, p. 49.
The same is true with respect to the activities referred to in section 2 of the Portal Act in an action or proceeding relating to activities performed before May 14, 1947. See Senate Report, p. 45. See also Sec. 790.23.---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) The meaning of the word ``compensable'' is the same, for purposes of the statute, whether a contract or a custom or practice is involved. \77\---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\77\ See Sec. 790.9(b).---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(c) The phrase, ``custom or practice,'' is one which, in common meaning, is rather broad in scope. The meaning of these words as used in the Portal Act is not stated in the statute; it must be ascertained from their context and from other available evidence of the Congressional intent, with such aid as may be had from the many judicial decisions interpreting the words ``custom'' and ``practice'' as used in other connections. Although the legislative history casts little light on the precise limits of these terms, it is believed that the Congressional reference to contract, custom or practice was a deliberate use of non-technical words which are commonly understood and broad enough to cover every normal situation under which an employee works or an employer for compensation. \78\ Accordingly, ``custom'' and ``practice,'' as used in section 4(b) of the Portal Act, may be said to be descriptive generally of those situations where an employer, without being compelled to do so by an express provision of a contract, has paid employees for certain activities performed. One of the sponsors of the legislation in the House of Representatives indicated that the intention was not only ``to protect every collective bargaining agreement about these activities'' but ``to protect the agreement between one workman and his employer'' and ``every practice or custom which we assume must have entered into the minds of the people when they made the contract.'' \79\---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\78\ See colloquy between Senators Donnell and Tydings, 93 Cong. Rec. 2125, 2126; colloquy between Senators Donnell, Lodge, and Hawkes, 93 Cong. Rec. 2178, 2179; colloquy between Senators Donnell and Hawkes, 93 Cong. Rec. 2181, 2182. Statements of Senator Cooper, 93 Cong. Rec. 2293.
\79\ Statements of Representative Gwynne, 93 Cong. Rec. 1566.---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(d) The words, ``custom or practice,'' as used in the Portal Act, do not refer to industry custom or the habits of the community which are familiar to the people; these words are qualified by the phrase ``in effect * * * at the establishment or other place where such employee was employed.'' The compensability of an activity under custom or practice, for purposes of this Act, is tested by the custom or the practice at the ``particular place of business,'' ``plant,'' ``mine,'' ``factory,'' ``forest,'' etc. \80\---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\80\ Senate Report, p. 45; colloquy between Senators Donnell and Hawkes, 93 Cong. Rec. 2179.---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(e) ``The custom or practice'' by which compensability of an activity is tested under the statute is one ``covering such activity.'' Thus, a custom or practice to pay for washing up in the plant after the end of the workday, for example, would not necessarily establish the compensability of walking time thereafter from the washroom in the plant to the plant gate. It is enough, however, if there is a custom or practice covering ``such activity''; there is no provision, as there is with regard to contracts, that the custom or practice be one ``between such employee, his agent, or collective-bargaining representative, and his employer.'' \81\---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\81\ See Sec. 790.9(d).---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(f) Another qualification of the ``custom or practice'' referred to in the statute is that it be ``not inconsistent with a written or non-written contract'' of the kind mentioned therein. If the contract is silent on the question of compensability of the activity, a custom or practice to pay for it would not be inconsistent with the contract. \82\ However, the intent of the provision is that a custom or practice which is inconsistent with the terms of any such contract shall not be taken into account in determining whether such an activity is compensable. \83\---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\82\ Senate Report, pp. 45, 49; colloquy between Senators Donnell and Hawkes, 93 Cong. Rec. 2179.
\83\ Senate Report, pp. 45, 49.---------------------------------------------------------------------------