Brotherhood Locomotive v. Atchison Topeka R.R.

• Decision Date: 08 January 1996
• Docket Number: 941592
• Citation: 516 U.S. 152,133 L.Ed.2d 535,116 S.Ct. 595
• Parties: BROTHERHOOD OF LOCOMOTIVE ENGINEERS, et al., Petitioners, v. ATCHISON, TOPEKA & SANTA FE RAILROAD COMPANY, et al
• Court: U.S. Supreme Court

516 U.S. 152

116 S.Ct. 595

133 L.Ed.2d 535

BROTHERHOOD OF LOCOMOTIVE ENGINEERS, et al., Petitioners,

v ATCHISON, TOPEKA & SANTA FE RAILROAD COMPANY, et al.

No. 94-1592.

Supreme Court of the United States

Argued Oct. 30, 1995.

Decided Jan. 8, 1996.

Syllabus^*

The Hours of Service Act (HSA), 49 U.S.C.A. § 21101 et seq. (1995 Supp.), limits the number of hours that train crew employees can remain on duty. At times a train cannot reach a crew change point within the allotted time, however, so the railroad must stop the train in order that a new crew can replace the first, or ' 'outlawed,' ' crew. Transportation of the new crew to the train and the outlawed crew back to the terminal is called "deadhead transportation." Under § 21103(b)(4), "[t]ime spent in deadhead transportation to a duty assignment is time on duty, but time spent in deadhead transportation from a duty assignment to the place of final release is neither time on duty nor time off duty." The latter time is commonly termed "limbo time." After the Federal Railroad Administration, which administers the HSA, announced that it would follow a Ninth Circuit ruling that the time spent waiting for deadhead transportation from a duty site is on-duty time, respondent railroads filed this suit seeking direct review. The Seventh Circuit, sitting en banc, rejected the Ninth Circuit's interpretation and held that time spent waiting for deadhead transportation from a duty site is limbo time.

Held: The HSA's text, structure, and purposes demonstrate Congress' intent that time spent waiting for deadhead transportation from a duty site should be limbo time. As a matter of common usage, § 21103(b)(4)'s phrase "time spent in deadhead transportation" can be read to include the time spent waiting for such transportation. That this is so is also established by the HSA's provisions classifying given periods as on duty or off duty. When those provisions are considered in light of the HSA's purpose of promoting train safety, they reveal that on-duty time typically includes those hours that contribute to an employee's fatigue during his 12-hour shift. Thus, time spent waiting for deadhead transportation to a duty site should be classified as on-duty time because, along with the time spent in the transportation itself, it contributes to employee fatigue during the work assignment. But time spent waiting for deadhead transportation away from a duty site does not cause the fatigue that implicates safety concerns and so, like the deadhead transportation which follows it, the waiting time must be deemed limbo time. Finally, classification of the time at issue here as on-duty time would impose on railroads the very scheduling problems that Congress sought to avoid when it created limbo time as a compromise during the 1969 HSA amendment process. Petitioner unions' attempts to treat the time at issue as on-duty time under §§ 21103(b)(5), 21103(b)(1), and 21103(b)(3) are unpersuasive, as are the cases that they cite, all of which were decided before the 1969 amendments. Pp. 597-599.

44 F.3d 437 (C.A.9 1994), affirmed.

KENNEDY, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.

Lawrence M. Mann, Washington, DC, for petitioners.

Malcolm Stewart, Washington, DC, for federal respondent.

Ronald M. Johnson, Washington, DC, for private respondents.

Justice KENNEDY delivered the opinion of the Court.

We granted certiorari to resolve a division between two Courts of Appeals regarding the correct statutory classification, under the Hours of Service Act, 49 U.S.C.A. § 21101 et seq. (1995 Supp.), of the time that train employees spend waiting for transportation a t the end of their shift.

I

Congress enacted the Hours of Service Act (HSA) in 1907. Hours of Service Act, ch. 2939, § 1, 34 Stat. 1415. The HSA's purpose is to promote railroad safety by limiting the number of hours a train crew may remain on duty and by requiring railroads to provide crew members with a certain number of off-duty hours for rest between shifts. Ibid.; Chicago & Alton R. Co. v. United States, 247 U.S. 197, 199, 38 S.Ct. 442, 443, 62 L.Ed. 1066 (1918). In particular, the HSA provides that train employees may not remain on duty for more than 12 consecutive hours, and, having worked for that period, must be given at least 10 consecutive hours off duty. 49 U.S.C.A. § 21103(a) (1995 Supp.).

To comply with the HSA, railroads must schedule operations and crew assignments with some precision, for if operations require the crew to be on duty for more than 12 hours, the railroads may incur substantial penalties. The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) administers the HSA, and it is authorized to impose a fine of between $500 and $10,000 for each violation of the statute. § 21303(a)(2). For each crew member on duty longer than the statutory maximum there is a separate violation. Missouri, K., & T.R. Co. of Tex. v. United States, 231 U.S. 112, 118-119, 34 S.Ct. 26, 26-27, 58 L.Ed. 144 (1913); 48 CFR pt. 228, App. A, p. 244 (1994). The statute provides certain exceptions to the rules in cases of emergency. 49 U.S.C.A. § 21103(c) (1995 Supp.).

At times, of course, a train cannot reach the scheduled crew change point, or even a convenient change point, within the 12 hours. To avoid violating the HSA, the railroad must stop the train so that a new crew can replace the first crew, now called the "outlawed crew." Transportation of the new crew to the train and the outlawed crew back to the terminal is called "deadhead transportation." The HSA provides different treatment for the time spent in deadhead transportation, depending on whether the transportation is taking a replacement crew to the train or taking the outlawed crew from the train. The statute provides that time spent in deadhead transportation to a duty assignment is time on duty, while time spent in deadhead transportation from a duty assignment to the place of final release is neither time on duty nor time off duty. § 21103(b)(4). Time that is neither on duty nor off duty is referred to in the industry as "limbo time." At oral argument, the Court was advised that train employees are paid for limbo time.

We thus know how to treat the time the employee spends in the deadhead vehicle. The issue is how to classify the time the outlawed crew spends waiting for the deadhead transportation to arrive. Petitioners, the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and the United Transportation Union, claim the waiting time is on-duty time that counts against the 12-hour limit. Save for a short-lived period when it changed its policy to acquiesce in a decision of the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit that we shall recount, the FRA for many years has taken the contrary position. In its view, so long as crew members are not required to perform duties for the railroad while they wait, time spent waiting for deadhead transportation from a duty site is to be treated in the same way as the time in the deadhead transportation itself—that is, as limbo time. 58 Fed.Reg. 18163, 18164 (1993). The railroads, who are respondents along with the Secretary of Transportation, agree with the FRA's position.

In 1990 petitioners brought suit in California and Oregon, challenging the FRA's position. On appeal, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that the time spent waiting for deadhead transportation from a duty site is time on duty. The court concluded that the time was so defined before Congress amended the HSA in 1969 and that the 1969 amendments disclose no intent to change that result. United Transportation Union v. Skinner, 975 F.2d 1421, 1426-1428 (1992).

For the sake of uniformity, the F RA decided to apply the Ninth Circuit's interpretation of the HSA on a nationwide basis. It announced the policy change in an October 28, 1992, letter to Robert W. Blanchette, Vice President of the Association of American Railroads, App. 73, and later published notice in the Federal Register, 58 Fed.Reg. 18163 (1993). In response, nine major railroads instituted the present action, seeking direct review in the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit of the FRA's order changing its interpretation. A three-judge panel of the Seventh Circuit affirmed the FRA's order, see Atchison, T. & S.F.R. Co. v. Pena, 29 F.3d 324 (1994), but that opinion was superseded when the Seventh Circuit took the case en banc, 44 F.3d 437 (1994). The en banc court rejected the Ninth Circuit's interpretation and held that time spent waiting for deadhead transportation is limbo time.

Because of the importance of uniform nationwide application of the HSA's regulatory scheme, we granted certiorari.

II

In determining how time spent waiting for deadhead transportation should be classified, we begin with the text and design of the statute. As first enacted, the HSA divided all time into two categories—on duty and off duty —but it did not define either term. Congress amended the HSA in 1969, reducing the number of permissible on-duty hours and providing some specific rules for determining if a given period of time should be considered on duty or off duty. These statutory provisions are the controlling guide in the case before us, and are as follows:

"(1) Time on duty begins when the employee reports for duty and ends when the employee is finally released from duty.

"(2) Time the employee is engaged in or connected with the movement of a train is time on duty.

"(3) Time spent performing any other service for the railroad carrier during a 24-hour period in which the employee is engaged in or connected with the movement of a train is time on duty.

"(4) Time spent in deadhead transportation to a duty assignment is time on duty, but time spent in deadhead transportation from a duty assignment to the place of final release is neither time on duty nor time off duty.

"(5) An interim period available for rest at a place other than a designated terminal is time on duty.

"(6) An interim period available for...