§ 782.6 Mechanics.

MorrisMcComb,WallingSilver Bros.,McDuffieHayes Freight Lines,WallingSilver Fleet Motor Express,KeelingHuber & Huber Motor Express,WallingHuber & Huber Motor Express,TinerellaDes Moines Transp. Co.,RobbinsZabarsky,WestSmoky Mt. Stages,WallingCumberland & Liberty Mills Co.EsibillMarshallKeeganRuppertBakerSharpless Hendler Ice Cream Co.Kentucky Transport Co.DrakeMcDuffieHayes Freight Lines,WallingSilver Fleet Motor Express,WolfeUnion Transfer & Storage Co.,Mason & Dixon LinesLigonWallingKentucky Transport Co.DrakeWallingSilver Fleet Motor Express,WallingPalmer,McDuffieHayes Freight Lines,WallingSilver Fleet Motor Express,WallingPalmer,WallingGordon's Transports(a) A “mechanic,” for purposes of safety regulations under the Motor Carrier Act is an employee who is employed by a carrier subject to the Secretary's jurisdiction under section 204 of the Motor Carrier Act and whose duty it is to keep motor vehicles operated in interstate or foreign commerce by his employer in a good and safe working condition. (Ex parte, Nos. MC-2 and MC-3, 28 M.C.C. 125, 132, 133. Ex parte No. MC-40 (Sub. No. 2), 88 M.C.C. 710 (repair of refrigeration equipment). See also v. 332 U.S. 422.) It has been determined that the safety of operation of such motor vehicles on the highways is directly affected by those activities of mechanics, such as keeping the lights and brakes in a good and safe working condition, which prevent the vehicles from becoming potential hazards to highway safety and thus aid in the prevention of accidents. The courts have held that mechanics perform work of this character where they actually do inspection, adjustment, repair or maintenance work on the motor vehicles themselves (including trucks, tractors and trailers, and buses) and are, when so engaged, directly responsible for creating or maintaining physical conditions essential to the safety of the vehicles on the highways through the correction or prevention of defects which have a direct causal connection with the safe operation of the unit as a whole. ( v. 136 F. (2d) 168 (C.A. 1); v. 71 F. Supp. 755; v. 67 F. Supp. 846; v. 57 F. Supp. 617; v. 67 F. Supp. 855; v. 41 F. Supp. 798; v. 44 F. Supp. 867; V. 40 F. Supp. 296; v. (S.D. Fla.), 6 Labor Cases, par. 61,184; v. (D. N.J.), 6 Labor Cases, par. 61,256; v. (S.D. N.Y.), 7 Labor Cases, par. 61,726; v. (E.D. Pa.), 10 Labor Cases, par. 62,956; v. (Ky. Ct. App.). 182 SW (2d) 960.) The following activities performed by mechanics on motor vehicles operated in interstate or foreign commerce are illustrative of the specific kinds of activities which the courts, in applying the foregoing principles, have regarded as directly affecting “safety of operation”: The inspection, repair, adjustment, and maintenance for safe operation of steering apparatus, lights, brakes, horns, windshield wipers, wheels and axles, bushings, transmissions, differentials, motors, starters and ignition, carburetors, fifth wheels, springs and spring hangers, frames, and gasoline tanks ( v. 71 F. Supp. 755; v. 67 F. Supp. 846; v. 48 F. Supp. 855; v. (Tenn. Ct. App.) 7 Labor Cases, par. 61,962; v. Palmer, 67 F. Supp. 12; v. (Ky. Ct. App.), 182 SW (2d) 960.) Inspecting and checking air pressure in tires, changing tires, and repairing and rebuilding tires for immediate replacement on the vehicle from which they were removed have also been held to affect safety of operation directly. ( v. 67 F. Supp. 846; v. 67 F. Supp. 12. See also v. 71 F. Supp. 755.) The same is true of hooking up tractors and trailers, including light and brake connections, and the inspection of such hookups. ( v. 67 F. Supp. 846; v. 67 F. Supp. 12. See also v. (W.D. Tenn.). 10 Labor cases, par. 62,934, affirmed 162 F. (2d) 203 (C.A. 6), certiorari denied 332 U.S. 744.)

MorrisMcComb,Pyramid Motor Freight Corp.Ispass.LevinsonSpector Motor Service,WallingSilver Bros.,RobbinsZabarsky,Mason & Dixon LinesLigonMorrisMcComb,LevinsonSpector Motor Service,(b) The section 13(b)(1) exemption applies, in accordance with principles previously stated (see § 782.2), to an employee whose job involves activities consisting wholly or in part of doing, or immediately directing, a class of work which, under the definitions referred to above, is that of a “mechanic” and directly affects the safety of operation of motor vehicles on the public highways in interstate or foreign commerce, within the meaning of the Motor Carrier Act. The power under the Motor Carrier Act to establish qualifications and maximum hours of service for such an employee has been sustained by the courts. ( v. 332 U.S. 422. See also v. 330 U.S. 695; v. 330 U.S. 649; v. 136 F. (2d) 168 (C.C.A. 1)). A supervisory employee who plans and immediately directs and checks the proper performance of this class of work may come within the exemption as a partial-duty mechanic. ( v. 44 F. Supp. 867; v. (Tenn. Ct. App.), 7 Labor Cases par. 61,962; cf. v. 332 U.S. 422 and v. 330 U.S. 649)

WirtzTyler Pipe & Foundry Co.,MorrisMcComb,KeelingHuber & Huber Motor Express,WallingHuber & Huber Motor Express,WallingSilver Fleet Motor Express,McDuffieHayes Freight Lines,AnuchickTransamerican Freight Lines,WallingBurlington Transp. Co.ColbeckDairyland Creamery Co.Pyramid Motor Freight Corp.IspassMorrisMcComb,CampbellRiss & Co.McDuffieHayes Freight Lines,WallingSilver Fleet Motor Express,HutchinsonBarry,WallingPalmer,AnuchickTransamerican Freight Lines,BumpusContinental Baking Co.GreenRiss & Co.,WallingBurlington Transp. Co.KeeganRuppertWallingEast Texas Freight LinesCollierAcme Freight Lines,Potashnik Local Truck SystemArcherOvernight Motor Corp.Missel,AnuchickTransamerican Freight Lines,WallingSilver Fleet Motor Express,McDuffieHayes Freight LinesWallingBurlington Transp. Co.ColbeckDairyland Creamery Co.(c)(1) An employee of a carrier by motor vehicle is not exempted as a “mechanic” from the overtime provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act under section 13(b)(1) merely because he works in the carrier's gargage, or because he is called a “mechanic,” or because he is a mechanic by trade and does mechanical work. ( v. 369 F. 2d 927 (C.A. 5).) The exemption applies only if he is doing a class of work defined as that of a “mechanic”, including activities which directly affect the safety of operation of motor vehicles in transporation on the public highways in interstate or foreign commerce. ( v. 332 U.S. 422; v. 57 F. Supp. 617; v. 67 F. Supp. 855; v. 67 F. Supp. 846; v. 71 F. Supp. 755; v. 46 F. Supp. 861; v. (D. Nebr.), 9 Labor Cases, par. 62,576. Compare Ex parte No. MC-40 (Sub. No. 2), 88 M.C.C. 710 with v. (S.D. Sup. Ct.), 17 N.W. (2d) 262. See also v. 330 U.S. 695.) Activities which do not directly affect such safety of operation include those performed by employees whose jobs are confined to such work as that of dispatchers, carpenters, tarpaulin tailors vehicle painters, or servicemen who do nothing but oil, gas, grease, or wash the motor vehicles. (Ex parte Nos. MC-2 and MC-3, 28 M.C.C. 125, 132, 133, 135) To these may be added activities such as filling radiators, checking batteries, and the usual work of such employees as stockroom personnel, watchmen, porters, and garage employees performing menial nondiscretionary tasks or disassembling work. Employees whose work is confined to such “nonsafety” activities are not within the exemption, even though the proper performance of their work may have an indirect effect on the safety of operation of the motor vehicles on the highways. ( v. 332 U.S. 422; v. (W.D. Mo.), 5 Labor Cases, par. 61,092 (dispatcher); v. 71 F. Supp. 755 (work of janitor and caretaker, carpentry work, body building, removing paint, preparing for repainting, and painting); v. 67 F. Supp. 846 (body building, construction work, painting and lettering); v. 50 F. Supp. 292 (washing vehicles); v. 67 F. Supp. 12 (putting water in radiators and batteries, oil and gas in vehicles, and washing vehicles); v. 46 F. Supp. 861 (body builders, tarpaulin worker, stockroom boy, night watchman, porter); v. (W.D. Tenn.), 1 Wage Hour Cases 920 (painter), reversed on other grounds 124 F. (2d) 549; v. 45 F. Supp. 648 (night watchman and gas pump attendant); v. (D. Nebr.), 9 Labor Cases, par. 62,576 (body builders); v. (S.D. N.Y.), 7 Labor Cases, par. 61,726 (greasing and washing); v. (N.D. Tex.), 8 Labor Cases, par. 62,083 (Menial tasks); v. unreported (S.D. Fla., Oct. 1943) (same); v. (Ark. Sup. Ct.). 179 S.W. (2d) 696 (checking trucks in and out and acting as night dispatcher, among other duties); v. 316 U.S. 572 (rate clerk with part-time duties as dispatcher).) The same has been held true of employees whose activities are confined to construction work, manufacture or rebuilding of truck, bus, or trailer bodies, and other duties which are concerned with the safe carriage of the contents of the vehicle rather than directly with the safety of operation on the public highways of the motor vehicle itself ( v. 46 F. Supp. 816; v. 67 F. Supp. 846; v. 71 F. Supp. 755; v. (D. Nebr.), 9 Labor Cases, par. 62,576. Compare v. (S.D. Sup. Ct.) 17 N.W. (2d) 262 with Ex parte No. MC-40 (Sub. No. 2), 88 M.C.C. 710.)

(2) The distinction between direct and indirect effects on safety of operation is exemplified by the comments in rejecting the contention in Ex parte Nos. MC-2 and MC-3, 28 M.C.C. 125, 135, that the activities of dispatchers directly affect safety of operation. It was stated: “It is contended that if a dispatcher by an error in judgment assigns a vehicle of insufficient size and weight-carrying capacity to transport the load, or calls a driver to duty who is sick, fatigued, or otherwise not in condition to operate the vehicle, or requires or permits the vehicle to depart when the roads are icy and the country to be traversed is hilly, an accident may result. While this may be true, it is clear that such errors in judgment are not the proximate causes of such accidents, and the dispatchers engage in no activities which directly affect the safety of operation of motor vehicles in interstate or foreign commerce.”

KeelingHuber & Huber Motor Express,WallingHuber & Huber Motor Express,Kentucky Transport Co.DrakeAnuchickTransamerican Freight Lines,Yellow Transit Freight Lines Inc.BalsenBakerSharpless Hendler Ice Cream Co.(3) Similarly, the exemption has been held inapplicable to mechanics repairing and rebuilding parts, batteries, and tires removed from vehicles where a direct causal connection between their work and the safe operation of motor vehicles on the highways is lacking because they do no actual work on the vehicles themselves and entirely different employees have the exclusive responsibility for determining whether the products of their work are suitable for use, and for the correct installation of such parts, on the vehicles. ( v. 57 F. Supp. 617; v. 67 F. Supp. 855) Mechanical work on motor vehicles of a carrier which is performed in order to make the vehicles conform to technical legal requirements rather than to prevent accidents on the highways has not been regarded by the courts as work directly affecting “safety of operation.” ( v. (Ky. Ct. App.), 182 S.W. (2d) 960; v. 46 F. Supp. 861; v. 320 F. (2d) 495 (C.A. 8)) And it is clear that no mechanical work on motor vehicles can be considered to affect safety of operation of such vehicles in interstate or foreign commerce if the vehicles are never in fact used in transportation in such commerce on the public highways. ( v. (E.D. Pa.), 10 Labor Cases, par. 62,956)