37 verifiable claims checked across the federal Portal-to-Portal Act framework, the seven §785 travel-time regulations (§§785.33, 785.35–785.41), the 1996 Employee Commuting Flexibility Act, the FLSA regular-rate regulations covering travel-time / overtime layering (§§778.115, 778.208, 778.209, 778.419, 778.303), the meal-period and anti-kickback cross-references (§785.19, §531.35), the five landmark Supreme Court decisions on hours worked and continuous workday (Mt. Clemens, IBP, Integrity Staffing, Tyson Foods, and the December 2025 11th Circuit Villarino v. Pacesetter), the California Supreme Court's Morillion + Troester decisions and the Overton v. Walt Disney Court of Appeal carve-out, the pending-Supreme-Court Camp v. Home Depot rounding precedent, the state-by-state hours-worked statutes (NY, WA, OR, MA, CO), and the FLSA motor-carrier and recordkeeping cross-references. 35 claims ship ✓ Verified against Tier 1 sources; 2 ship ⚠ Partial where the article generalizes across multiple primary sources without naming a single dispositive citation (the post-2018 DLSE opinion-letter line, and CA IWC Wage Order 16 construction-industry travel provisions). No ✗ Issues.
26 claims
The Portal-to-Portal Act (1947), codified at 29 USC §254, excludes ordinary commute and preliminary/postliminary activities from FLSA compensable hours worked
The Employee Commuting Flexibility Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-188, §§ 2101–2103, 110 Stat. 1928) amended 29 USC §254(a) to clarify that employer-provided-vehicle commute travel is NOT a principal activity when the travel is within the normal commuting area and use of the vehicle is subject to a written agreement between employer and employee
ECFA was Title II of the Small Business Job Protection Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-188); §§ 2101–2103. The written-agreement requirement is the operative condition for the safe harbor.
29 CFR §785.33 introduces Subpart C's travel-time framework and cross-references §785.34 (Portal-to-Portal Act application) and §§785.35–785.41 (the four federal travel categories)
The travel-time sections live in Subpart C (Application of Principles), not Subpart D (which covers recordkeeping at §§785.46–785.48).
29 CFR §785.35 establishes that ordinary home-to-work travel is NOT worktime — including for employees who work at different job sites — and concludes with the bright-line rule "Normal travel from home to work is not worktime"
Article quotes the regulation verbatim; closing sentence "Normal travel from home to work is not worktime" appears in the final paragraph of §785.35.
29 CFR §785.36 makes emergency callbacks to a customer site compensable when the employee is "called out at night to travel a substantial distance to perform an emergency job" — but takes no position on emergency travel back to the regular workplace
The "no position" language for emergency travel back to the regular workplace is explicit in §785.36's text; not an article extrapolation.
29 CFR §785.37 makes special one-day out-of-city assignments compensable, with deductions for normal home-to-depot commute time and normal meal periods; the regulation uses a Washington-DC-to-NYC example (depart 8am, arrive noon, work through 3pm, return at 7pm)
The DC/NYC example is the canonical illustration in §785.37; "the employer's benefit and at his special request" phrasing and "integral part of the 'principal' activity" framing are verbatim.
29 CFR §785.38 makes site-to-site travel during the workday compensable, and extends compensability to travel from a mandatory meeting place — where the employee receives instructions, performs work, or picks up and carries tools — to the work place
The "meeting place to receive instructions or to pick up and to carry tools" language is verbatim. The end-of-day boundary example (5pm finish → 8pm job → 9pm return to employer's premises = all working time, vs. 8pm finish → going home = home-to-work after 8pm) is also from the regulation's text.
29 CFR §785.39 makes overnight business travel as a passenger compensable only during regular working hours, including the corresponding hours on nonworking days (Saturday/Sunday for a Monday-Friday employee), with regular meal periods deducted
The "corresponding hours on nonworking days" rule and the Monday-Friday 9-to-5 example are verbatim from §785.39's text. The "as an enforcement policy the Divisions will not consider as worktime that time spent in travel away from home outside of regular working hours as a passenger" phrasing is also verbatim.
29 CFR §785.40 allows the employer to count either the driving time OR the equivalent public-transit hours when the employee is "offered public transportation but requests permission to drive his car instead"
The "offered public transportation but requests permission to drive" framing is verbatim. The regulation explicitly grants the employer the choice between actual driving time and equivalent public-transit hours.
29 CFR §785.41 makes work performed while traveling compensable, treats drivers of vehicles (truck, bus, automobile, boat, airplane) and required-to-ride assistants/helpers as working while riding, with exceptions for bona fide meal periods and sleep in adequate employer-furnished facilities
The meal-period and sleep-in-adequate-facilities exceptions are baked into the regulation's verbatim text.
29 CFR §552 (Domestic Service) was amended in 2013 (effective January 1, 2015 after litigation delay) to narrow the FLSA companionship-services exemption, generally covering drive time between patient locations for home-care workers employed by third-party agencies
The Home Care Final Rule was promulgated in October 2013 with a Jan. 1, 2015 effective date; vacatur litigation in Home Care Association of America v. Weil delayed implementation until October 13, 2015 when the D.C. Circuit reversed the district court vacatur.
29 CFR §778.115 governs the "two regular rates" weighted-average regular-rate calculation when an employee works at two different hourly rates during the same workweek
§778.115 is the weighted-average regular rate default; §778.419 alternative (different rate elected for overtime) requires advance agreement.
29 CFR §778.419 permits the employer and employee to elect by advance agreement that overtime will be paid at the rate applicable to the work performed during the overtime hours, as an alternative to the §778.115 weighted-average regular rate
§778.419 is the load-bearing exception to §778.115's weighted-average default. The advance-agreement requirement is what keeps the alternative rarely used in practice — most employers don't structure the agreement before the workweek and then rely on §778.115 by default.
29 CFR §778.208 and §778.209 require non-discretionary bonuses to be included in the regular rate for overtime, with the bonus apportioned across all compensable hours in the bonus period
§778.208 establishes which bonuses are excluded from the regular rate (statutorily discretionary, gift bonuses, certain profit-sharing); §778.209 covers the method of inclusion for non-discretionary bonuses including the apportionment-across-all-compensable-hours rule. The shipped how-to-calculate-retro-pay article covers the §778.303 retroactive-recompute mechanic when bonus inclusion is corrected late — same statute/regulation cluster.
FLSA §16(b) (29 USC §216(b)) provides for liquidated damages equal to the amount of unpaid wages, effectively doubling back-pay liability when overtime violations are found
§216(b) doubling is statutorily mandatory unless the employer establishes a §260 good-faith defense. Same statute cited in the shipped how-to-calculate-retro-pay article's §16(b) coverage.
29 CFR §785.19 defines bona fide meal periods — only periods during which the employee is completely relieved of duty qualify; the deduction in §785.39 for overnight travel applies only to bona fide meal periods
§785.19 establishes the "completely relieved of duty" standard for meal periods. The cross-reference into §785.39's overnight-travel meal-period deduction is the load-bearing detail: a meal during which the employee answers a customer call doesn't qualify, and the deduction is unavailable. The companion meal-and-rest cluster article carries the federal-vs-state framework.
29 CFR §531.35 establishes the federal "anti-kickback" rule — required vehicle / equipment expenses cannot reduce wages below the FLSA minimum
§531.35 is the federal floor for expense-reimbursement obligations under the FLSA. State law (CA Labor Code §2802 etc.) layers stricter obligations on top. The shipped mileage-reimbursement-requirements-by-state article carries the full federal-vs-state framework.
29 CFR §516.2 establishes the basic FLSA payroll-record requirements, including hours worked each workday and each workweek
See the shipped recordkeeping-requirements-by-state article for the §516 retention windows and the per-state extensions.
The FLSA "motor carrier exemption" (29 USC §213(b)(1)) exempts most interstate commercial-motor-vehicle drivers from FLSA overtime, though travel time remains compensable for minimum-wage purposes
The motor-carrier exemption applies to drivers, drivers' helpers, loaders, and mechanics whose duties affect the safety of operation of CMVs in interstate commerce. State law (CA Labor Code §§510, 1194 et al.; OR ORS 653.261; WA RCW 49.46.130) sometimes restores the overtime entitlement.
California IWC Wage Order No. 14-80 (Agricultural Occupations) was the specific wage order at issue in Morillion v. Royal Packing; the "subject to control" hours-worked language appears across all IWC Wage Orders (1 through 17)
Wage Order 14 covers agricultural occupations; the "-80" suffix reflects the 1980 promulgation date. The "subject to control" language is consistent across all IWC Wage Orders; the sector-by-sector promulgation means wage-order numbering matters for some sector-specific provisions but not for the core hours-worked doctrine.
California IWC Wage Order 16 (Construction, Drilling, Logging, and Mining Occupations) has additional reporting-time and travel-time provisions that trigger compensable travel from mandatory crew meeting points more readily than under federal law
Wage Order 16's existence and construction-industry scope are well-established at the DIR canonical page. The specific "additional reporting-time and travel-time provisions" claim summarizes Sections 5 (reporting time) and 5(D) (travel-time minimum) without naming the section text verbatim — the article body softens the claim to "additional reporting-time and travel-time provisions" rather than overstating the precision. Suggested revision: none required if the soft framing is preserved on future edits.
New York Labor Law §663 + NYCRR Title 12 define "hours worked" to include time the employee is "required to be available for work at a place prescribed by the employer," broader than FLSA
Same source basis as in the shipped off-the-clock-work-by-state article's NY row.
Washington WAC 296-126-002 defines "hours worked" to include "all time during which an employee is authorized or required to be on duty on the employer's premises or at a prescribed workplace"
Oregon ORS 653.010 defines "hours worked" to include time the employee is "required or permitted" to work plus time the employee is required to be at a prescribed location
Massachusetts General Laws c.149 §150 provides for automatic treble damages on wage-and-hour violations
Mandatory treble damages have applied since 2008 amendments (formerly discretionary). Same source as the shipped off-the-clock-work-by-state article.
Colorado CDLE COMPS Order Rule 1.9 (2020 revision) defines "hours worked" to include "all time during which an employee is performing labor or services for the benefit of an employer"; the 2020 revision explicitly captured pre/post-shift required activities
COMPS Order #36 (effective Jan. 1, 2020) was the original revision; subsequent COMPS Orders #37 (2021) and #38 (2022) onward preserved the Rule 1.9 hours-worked definition.
9 claims
Camp v. Home Depot U.S.A., 84 Cal. App. 5th 638 (Cal. Ct. App. 2022) held that California's "all the time worked" mandate prohibits time-clock rounding when the employer's timekeeping system captures exact minutes; the California Supreme Court granted review in February 2023 (S277518)
Camp is the California Court of Appeal decision (not Supreme Court). CA Supreme Court granted review February 2023 (S277518); as of 2026-05-25, the Court has not yet decided. Under California Rules of Court 8.1115(e)(1), Camp can be cited only as persuasive authority during review — not as binding precedent. The article body carries this procedural caveat. Same case + procedural posture as in the shipped time-clock-rounding-rules article.
Integrity Staffing Solutions, Inc. v. Busk, 574 U.S. 27 (2014) established the federal test that an activity is integral and indispensable to the principal activities "if it is an intrinsic element of those activities and one with which the employee cannot dispense if he is to perform his principal activities"
The quote is verbatim from Justice Thomas's unanimous opinion. Same SCOTUS case as in the shipped off-the-clock-work-by-state article.
IBP, Inc. v. Alvarez, 546 U.S. 21 (2005) established the continuous-workday doctrine — once the workday begins via the first compensable "integral and indispensable" activity, all time until the last compensable activity is part of the continuous workday including travel between work-site components
Justice Stevens's unanimous opinion. The continuous-workday holding extends to time walking between gear-donning area and production floor at IBP's meat-processing plants; the doctrine has been applied to field-service, healthcare, and other multi-stage workdays.
Villarino v. Pacesetter Personnel Service, Inc., No. 23-10645 (11th Cir. Dec. 5, 2025) held that optional employer-provided transit and optional tool pickup were NOT integral and indispensable under the federal Portal-to-Portal Act, and that employer transportation cost deductions from wages were lawful when the transit served employees' commuting convenience
Published Eleventh Circuit opinion, No. 23-10645, filed Dec. 5, 2025. The court affirmed summary judgment for the employer on optional transportation, tool collection, waiting-time, and transportation-deduction claims.
Morillion v. Royal Packing Co., 22 Cal.4th 575, 94 Cal.Rptr.2d 3, 995 P.2d 139 (Cal. 2000) held that mandatory employer-provided bus transit from a designated pickup point to remote agricultural fields is compensable as "hours worked" under California IWC Wage Order No. 14-80; workers were "subject to the control" of the employer and that prong alone is sufficient, independent of the "suffered or permitted to work" prong
The full reporter citation (94 Cal.Rptr.2d 3, 995 P.2d 139) and the Wage Order 14-80 holding match across Justia, FindLaw, vLex, and CourtListener summaries.
Overton v. Walt Disney Co., 136 Cal.App.4th 263 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006) held that Disney did NOT owe pay for a satellite-parking-lot shuttle ride because Disney did not REQUIRE employees to park in the satellite lot; the case distinguishes Morillion on the required-vs-permitted axis
90% of employees used the shuttle, 10% used alternate transportation — the case turned on whether use was required, not on actual usage rates.
Troester v. Starbucks Corp., 5 Cal.5th 829 (2018) rejected the federal de minimis doctrine for California state-law claims, holding that even small amounts of regular off-the-clock work are compensable
Same case as in the shipped off-the-clock-work-by-state article. Applied to travel time, Troester means even small amounts of pre-shift / post-shift travel are compensable in California when required or under employer control; the federal ~10-minute-per-day de minimis threshold doesn't apply.
Anderson v. Mt. Clemens Pottery Co., 328 U.S. 680 (1946) established the burden-shifting rule that when an employer fails to keep adequate time records, the employee can meet the burden of proof by showing "just and reasonable inference" of unpaid hours, and the burden then shifts to the employer to prove actual hours worked
Same SCOTUS case as in the shipped off-the-clock-work-by-state article.
Tyson Foods, Inc. v. Bouaphakeo, 577 U.S. 442 (2016) held that representative evidence (average donning/doffing time × number of employees) is admissible to establish class-wide damages when employer recordkeeping failure makes individualized proof impractical
Justice Kennedy's opinion. Same SCOTUS case as in the shipped off-the-clock-work-by-state article. Combined with Mt. Clemens burden-shifting, makes class certification dramatically easier when employer records are deficient.
2 claims
California Labor Commissioner DLSE opinion letters since 2018 have extended Morillion's "subject to control" reasoning to parking-lot-to-building shuttle scenarios and informally-but-effectively mandatory transit policies
The DLSE opinion-letter archive is the canonical source; the article generalizes across multiple opinion letters from 2018-2024 without naming a single dispositive letter URL. The pattern (Morillion extended to parking-lot-to-building shuttles when the lot is mandatory; "voluntary on paper, fired in practice" policies triggering compensability) is consistent across the post-2018 letter line per practitioner commentary, but a single primary citation isn't possible. The article body has been kept soft on the specific letter references; the trend description is the verifiable claim.
DOL Fact Sheet #22 (Hours Worked Under the FLSA) is the canonical Wage and Hour Division reference for compensable-time questions
Fact Sheet #22 is the WHD-published canonical reference covering Portal-to-Portal Act, integral-and-indispensable, waiting time, on-call time, rest/meal periods, training time, travel time, and lectures/meetings.
54 unique sources cited across the report — click to audit any claim directly against its evidence.
CA IWC Wage Order 16 specific travel-time-section text not pulled verbatim. The article describes Wage Order 16 as having "additional reporting-time and travel-time provisions" that "trigger compensable travel from mandatory crew meeting points more readily than under federal law." Wage Order 16 Section 5 (reporting time) and Section 5(D) (travel-time minimum) support this generalization, but the article doesn't cite the section text verbatim. Suggested revision: none required — the soft framing accurately conveys the doctrine without overstating specific text. If future edits add a verbatim citation, pull the wage-order text from the DIR canonical page and update this claim.
Post-2018 DLSE opinion-letter line cited as a trend, not as a single dispositive letter. The article references "California Labor Commissioner DLSE opinion letters (post-2018)" extending Morillion to parking-lot-and-shuttle scenarios. The pattern is well-documented in practitioner commentary but no single opinion letter is the dispositive citation; the article's framing handles this by describing the trend rather than naming a specific letter. Suggested revision: none required — the soft attribution accurately conveys the body of opinion-letter authority without overstating individual citations. If future edits surface a load-bearing single letter, link it directly and elevate the claim to ✓ Verified.
Every claim above links to the source we used. Open any source to compare the wording here with the underlying rule, guidance, court opinion, or product behavior.
If a source has changed or a claim looks wrong, tell us. We would rather correct the page than leave a stale answer online. See how we fact-check.
Clockspot helps small businesses track employee time and keep payroll-ready records. Used in all 50 states since 2007, we focus on getting time and pay right — including the wage-and-hour rules that shape both.
We build Clockspot for the same reason we publish these reports: time records should be understandable, reviewable, and tied to the rules that affect payroll. See how Clockspot works.