Long Island Care At Home, LTD., et al. v. Evelyn Coke (551 U.S. 158)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided June 11, 2007 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 551 U.S. 158 · 127 S. Ct. 2339
- Decided
- June 11, 2007
- Term
- October Term 2006
- Vote
- 9–0
- Majority author
- Justice Breyer
- Issue area
- Unions
- Disposition
- Reversed and remanded
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
Justice Breyer delivered the opinion of the Court. A provision of the Fair Labor Standards Act exempts from the statute’s minimum wage and maximum hours rules “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 [of Labor]).” 29 U. S. C. §213(a)(15). A Department of Labor regulation (labeled an “interpretation”) says that this statutory exemption includes those “companionship” workers who “are employed by an employer or agency other than the family or household using their services.” 29 CFR § 552.109(a) (2006). The question before us is whether, in light of the statute’s text and history, and a different (apparently conflicting) regulation, the Department’s regulation is valid and binding. See Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U. S. 837, 843-844 (1984). We conclude that it is. I A In 1974, Congress amended the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (FLSA or Act), 52 Stat. 1060, to include many “domestic service” employees not previously subject to its minimum wage and maximum hour requirements. See Fair Labor Standards Amendments of 1974 (1974 Amendments), §§ 7(b)(1), (2), 88 Stat. 62 (adding 29 U. S. C. §206(f), which provides for a minimum wage for…
Excerpt of a 28,013-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.