| 词条 | Walling v. Helmerich & Payne, Inc. |
| 释义 |
|Litigants= Walling v. Helmerich & Payne, Inc. |ArgueDate=October 17 |ArgueYear=1944 |DecideDate= November 6 |DecideYear=1944 |FullName= Walling v. Helmerich & Payne, Inc. |USVol=323 |USPage=37 |ParallelCitations=65 S. Ct. 11; 89 L. Ed. 29 |OralArgument= |OpinionAnnouncement= |Prior=138 F.2d 705 (10th Cir. 1943); cert. granted, {{ussc|321|759|1944|el=no}}. |Subsequent= |Holding=Contracts of employment providing for the computation of compensation on the so-called Poxon or split-day plan do not conform to the requirements of § 7(a) of the Fair Labor Standards Act. |SCOTUS=1943-1945 |Majority=Murphy |JoinMajority=unanimous |LawsApplied=Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 }} Walling v Helmerich and Payne Inc, 323 U.S. 37 (1944), is a US labor law case, concerning the minimum wage. FactsThe employer, Helmerich and Payne Inc had the practice of paying workers more in the second half of the day than the first, so that overtime on weekends was calculated to the lower rate (clocked premiums) and could not be premium pay, so as to keep wages for overtime the average. JudgmentJustice Murphy, writing for the majority, held that clock premiums or rolled up pay cannot be treated as premium pay. {{sect-stub|date=August 2017}}See also{{Slist wage}}
References{{refs|2}}External links
| case = Walling v. Helmerich & Payne, Inc., {{ussc|323|37|1944|el=no}} | justia =https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/323/37/ | loc =http://cdn.loc.gov/service/ll/usrep/usrep323/usrep323037/usrep323037.pdf 4 : United States labor case law|United States Supreme Court cases|United States Supreme Court cases of the Stone Court|1944 in United States case law |
| 随便看 |
|
开放百科全书收录14589846条英语、德语、日语等多语种百科知识，基本涵盖了大多数领域的百科知识，是一部内容自由、开放的电子版国际百科全书。