Walling v. Jacksonville Terminal Co., Civil Action No. 613-J.

Decision Date06 May 1944
Docket NumberCivil Action No. 613-J.
Citation55 F. Supp. 302
PartiesWALLING, Adm'r of Wage and Hour Division, U. S. Department of Labor, v. JACKSONVILLE TERMINAL CO.
CourtU.S. District Court — Southern District of Florida

Douglas B. Maggs and Archibald Cox, both of Washington, D. C., and George A. Downing and Dakyns B. Stover, both of Atlanta, Ga., for plaintiff.

Charles Cook Howell, Elliott Adams, and Harold B. Wahl, all of Jacksonville, Fla., for defendant.

De VANE, District Judge.

Findings of Fact.

1. Defendant, Jacksonville Terminal Company, is a common carrier by railroad in interstate commerce. It operates a terminal at Jacksonville, Florida, where it furnishes the customary and usual terminal facilities to four main line railroads. These railroads are regularly engaged in the interstate transportation of passengers and freight, and the terminal is one of the places in, out and through which their trains pass in the course of delivering passengers and freight in interstate commerce.

2. Upon entering the terminal property of the defendant, every main line train becomes subject to the jurisdiction and authority of the defendant. Defendant's engine and switching service crews take over the moment the main line trains come to a stop in the station; they then break down incoming interstate trains and make up new ones therefrom for further movement in interstate commerce; and they perform all the other work incident to the conduct of an ordinary interstate railroad terminal business. An average of 100 trains are handled and serviced by defendant through its crews each day.

3. The employees engaged in performing these terminal services consist of conductors or foremen, engineers, firemen, switchmen, hostlers and hostler's helpers. A full crew in switching service consists of a conductor or foreman, two switchmen, engineer and fireman, and in road engine movement, of a hostler and hostler helper. Under defendant's labor agreement, defendant is required to, and does at all times, provide a full crew for the performance of these services.

4. It is the practice of the defendant, as of railroads generally, to require that all applicants for employment in engine and switching service qualify for such service by first undergoing a training period to learn the duties and activities of the position they seek, during which training period no compensation is paid to such trainees.

5. The trainee is assigned to work with a full crew for the purpose of receiving instructions to qualify him for employment. He learns first by observation and by performing the manual or physical work which he will be required to do upon becoming a regular employee. This training is done under the supervision of the members of the crew, particularly the member of the crew performing the character of work in which the trainee is being instructed.

6. Trainees are assigned no regular time at which to report for training, or hours in which to carry out the training routine. The general practice is for the trainee to report at the beginning of a shift to a particular engineer or crew, exhibit his permit to receive instruction and receive his training. The trainee is free to select such time each day as best suits his convenience and frequently receives instructions after completing a day's work on some other job.

7. Trainees are also required to study the rules and regulations for the conduct and operation of defendant's terminal and facilities and to become familiar with the terminal, its makeup, signal and interlocking devices and the location of tracks and other facilities. It is necessary for the trainee to pass an examination concerning these matters before he is qualified to work as a regular employee. After evidencing his ability to do the work and passing the required examination, the trainee is placed upon defendant's payroll and thereafter becomes entitled to the full journeyman's contract wage of approximately $1 per hour as established by collective bargaining agreements between defendant and representatives of its workers.

8. While many of the trainees are experienced in railroad operation, due to the fact that it is necessary for them to study the rules and regulations for the conduct and...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Kawatra v. Gardiner
    • United States
    • Tennessee Court of Appeals
    • November 2, 1988
    ...(1945). The Act is intended to be a wage and hour law for the benefit of underpaid and overworked persons, Walling v. Jacksonville Terminal Co., 55 F.Supp. 302, 304 (S.D.Fla.1944), aff'd, 148 F.2d 768 (5th Cir.1945), or, as President Franklin Roosevelt noted in his message to Congress intro......
  • Walling v. Jacksonville Terminal Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit
    • April 23, 1945
    ...hold said Jacksonville Terminal Company harmless for any injury I may receive. * * *" The district court summarized the situation thus 55 F.Supp. 302, 304): "None of the usual indicia of the employee relationship exist here as to the trainee. He is not subject to the rules of the defendant ......
  • Walling v. Portland Terminal Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Maine
    • June 18, 1945
    ...training. On the issue presented the facts in the case do not differ in any material respect from those set forth in Walling v. Jacksonville Terminal Co., 55 F.Supp. 302, affirmed on appeal by the Circuit Court of appeals in the Fifth Circuit April 23, 1945, 148 F.2d 768, and I follow that ......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT