翻訳と辞書
Words near each other
・ Garcia Live Volume One
・ Garcia Live Volume Three
・ Garcia Live Volume Two
・ Garcia Moniz
・ Garcia Moniz, o Gasco
・ Garcia nutans
・ Garcia Plays Dylan
・ Garcia Point
・ Garcia Report
・ Garcia River
・ Garcia River (Brazil)
・ Garcia River Forest
・ Garcia School
・ Garcia v National Australia Bank Ltd
・ Garcia v. Google, Inc.
Garcia v. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority
・ Garcia Wilderness
・ Garcia Álvarez de Figueroa
・ Garcia, California
・ Garcia, Colorado
・ Garcia, Tarragona
・ Garcia-class frigate
・ Garcia-Mir v. Meese
・ Garcia-Reynoso revolver
・ Garcia/Grisman
・ Garciadelia
・ Garciaparra
・ Garcias de Cisneros
・ Garciaz
・ Garcibarrigoa


Dictionary Lists
翻訳と辞書 辞書検索 [ 開発暫定版 ]
スポンサード リンク

Garcia v. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority : ウィキペディア英語版
Garcia v. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority

''Garcia v. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority'', 469 U.S. 528 (1985), is a United States Supreme Court decision in which the Court held that the Congress has the power under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution to extend the Fair Labor Standards Act, which requires that employers provide minimum wage and overtime pay to their employees, to state and local governments. In this case, the Court overruled its previous decision in ''National League of Cities v. Usery'', , in which the Court had held that regulation of the activities of state and local governments "in areas of traditional governmental functions" would violate the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
==History==
When Congress passed the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) in 1938, it did not apply either to employees of private transit companies or to employees of state and local governments. Congress extended coverage of the FLSA's minimum wage provisions to employees of private transit companies of a certain size in 1961, then amended the Act to cover some employees of state and local governments in 1966 by withdrawing the minimum wage and overtime exemptions for public hospitals, schools, and mass transit carriers whose rates and services were subject to state regulation. At the same time, Congress eliminated the overtime exemption for all mass transit employees other than drivers, operators, and conductors. Congress later phased out these overtime exemptions when amending the Act in 1974.
The Supreme Court held in ''Maryland v. Wirtz'', 392 U.S. 183 (1968) that Congress had the authority under the Commerce Clause to extend the FLSA to cover employees of public schools and hospitals. In 1976, however, the Court held in ''National League of Cities'' that Congress lacked authority to regulate the wages and hours of governmental employees performing "traditional governmental functions." The San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority (SAMTA, now known as VIA Metropolitan Transit), which had been observing the overtime requirements of federal law up to that point, responded by informing employees that it was no longer obliged to provide them with overtime pay.
In 1979, the Wage and Hour Division of the United States Department of Labor took the position that SAMTA's operations were covered by the FLSA because they were not a traditional governmental function. SAMTA then filed suit in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas seeking a declaratory judgment that its transit operations were beyond Congress' power to regulate. The Department of Labor filed a counterclaim seeking enforcement of the Act.
Joe G. Garcia and other employees of SAMTA brought their own suit in the same court seeking to recover the overtime pay they claimed they were owed. The court stayed that action but allowed Garcia to intervene as a defendant in the SAMTA declaratory judgment action against the Department of Labor.

抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア(Wikipedia)
ウィキペディアで「Garcia v. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority」の詳細全文を読む



スポンサード リンク
翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース

Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.