323 U.S. 134 (U.S. Supreme Court 1944)
Skidmore v. Swift & Co.
Are employees' standby or waiting hours compensable as "work" under the FLSA, and to what extent should courts defer to the Wage and Hour Administrator's interpretive guidance on that question?
Agency interpretations lacking the force of law are not controlling, but they are entitled to respect proportional to their persuasive power. The weight a court gives an agency's view depends on the thoroughness of its consideration, the validity and logic of its reasoning, its consistency with earlier and later pronouncements, and the agency's expertise and specialized experience. Under the FLSA, whether waiting or standby time is compensable is a fact-intensive inquiry. The central question is whether the time is spent predominantly for the employer's benefit. Factors include the degree of employer control, the geographic and temporal restrictions on the employee, the frequency and unpredictability of calls, and the extent to which the time can be effectively used for the employee's own purposes.
Agency interpretive rulings under the FLSA are entitled to respect to the extent they have the power to persuade but are not binding on courts. Whether the firefighters' standby time is compensable is not a categorical matter; it is a question for the trier of fact based on the totality of circumstances. The judgment for the employer was reversed and the case remanded for application of these principles.
Skidmore establishes the baseline, flexible approach to agency deference—often called persuasive or respect-based deference—that continues to guide courts when agencies interpret statutes through informal means (e.g., opinion letters, enforcement manuals, interpretive rules, guidance documents). It contrasts with Chevron's later, more deferential framework for interpretations issued with the force of law, and it remains central after United States v. Mead clarified that many agency actions receive only Skidmore respect. For labor and employment law, Skidmore also anchors the doctrine that compensability of waiting time hinges on the totality of circumstances, influencing numerous FLSA cases about on-call, standby, and sleep time. For law students, the case teaches how courts balance agency expertise with judicial judgment and how statutory terms are applied through context-sensitive, fact-based analysis.