Opinion
Morton J. Marks, Santurce, P.R., for plaintiff.
William J. Sheridan, Jr., Balboa Heights, Canal Zone, for defendants.
CROWE, District Judge.
This cause was brought by George P. Shultz, Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor, under section 17 of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, as amended (29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq.), hereinafter referred to as the Act, to, among other things, enjoin defendants Canal Zone Bus Service, Inc., a corporation, and Contract Services, Inc., a corporation, from violating the provisions of section 15(a)(2) of the Act, including the restraint of any withholding of minimum wages and overtime compensation found by the Court to be due to employees of the defendants under the Act.
The case came on before the Court on April 7, 1970, at Balboa, Canal Zone, plaintiff being represented by Morton J. Marks and defendants by William J. Sheridan, Jr. Having considered the stipulations of fact entered into by the parties in open court and evidence related thereto, arguments and statements of counsel, the pleadings, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, the Court does hereby now make and enter, pursuant to Rule 52 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, its Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law as follows:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Plaintiff, George P. Shultz, hereinafter referred to as plaintiff, is and at all times hereinafter mentioned was the duly appointed Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor, charged with the duties, responsibilities, and authority vested in him by the provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, as amended (52 Stat. 1060, as amended; 29 U.S.C. 201 et seq.), hereinafter referred to as the Act.
2. (a) Defendant Canal Zone Bus Service, Inc., is a subsidiary of Auto Service Company, S.A., and is, and at all times hereinafter mentioned was, a Delaware corporation registered, licensed, and doing business within the Canal Zone and within the jurisdiction of this Court.
(b) At all times hereinafter mentioned, defendant Canal Zone Bus Service, Inc. was and is engaged in the operation of a public franchised motor vehicle transportation system within the Canal Zone.
(c) The public franchised motor vehicle transportation system referred to in Finding of Fact No. 2(b) hereof, includes, among other activities, the transportation of passengers, on a fee basis, to, from, and between designated points within the Canal Zone.
(d) At all times hereinafter mentioned, the final and binding determinations and decisions concerning the operations and policies of defendant Canal Zone Bus Service, Inc. were and are under the direction, authority and control of Mr. Lawrence Adler.
3. (a) Defendant Contract Services, Inc. is a subsidiary of Auto Service Company, S.A., and is, and at all times hereinafter mentioned was, a Delaware corporation registered, licensed, and doing business within the Canal Zone and within the jurisdiction of this Court.
(b) At all times hereinafter mentioned, defendant Contract Services, Inc. was and is engaged in the operation of a contract transportation system by motor vehicle within the Canal Zone.
(c) The contract transportation system referred to in Finding of Fact No. 3(b) hereof includes, among other activities, the transportation by motor bus of school children to and from their homes and the various schools they are attending within the Canal Zone, pursuant to contract with the Armed Forces of the United States of America.
(d) At all times hereinafter mentioned, the final and binding determinations and decisions concerning the operations and policies of defendant Contract Services, Inc. were and are under the direction, authority and control of Mr. Lawrence Adler.
4. (a) Auto Service Company, S.A., referred to in Findings of Fact numbered 2 and 3 hereof, is and at all times hereinafter mentioned was, a Panamanian corporation with offices located within the Republic of Panama.
(b) At all times hereinafter mentioned, the final and binding determinations and decisions concerning the operations and policies of the aforesaid Auto Service Company, S.A. were and are under the direction, authority and control of Mr. Lawrence Adler.
5. (a) At all times hereinafter mentioned, defendants, and each of them, employed, and they are employing, a number of employees in and about their aforesaid places of business and elsewhere in the Canal Zone in:
(1) Ordering, receiving, unloading, handling, and otherwise working on goods, such as automotive parts, tires and related supplies, received from persons and firms located outside of the Canal Zone; (2) Transporting, within the Canal Zone, persons engaged in the operation and maintenance of the Panama Canal, the Canal Zone and the various military establishments located within the said Canal Zone; (3) Transporting, within the Canal Zone, pursuant to contract with the Armed Forces of the United States, dependents of persons engaged in the operation and maintenance of the various military establishments located within the said Canal Zone; and (4) Operating, maintaining, repairing and otherwise working on motor vehicles used in the transportation of persons to, from, and through points within the Canal Zone.
(b) At all times hereinafter mentioned, many of the employees employed by each defendant herein have been and are individually engaged in commerce and in the production of goods for commerce as defined in sections 3(b) and 3(j) of the Act.
6. (a) At all times hereinafter mentioned, the motor vehicle transportation systems operated by defendant Canal Zone Bus Service, Inc. and defendant Contract Services, Inc. were and are related, and were and are performed under common control for a common business purpose, within the meaning of section 3(r) of the Act.
(b) At all times hereinafter mentioned, the annual gross volume of sales (exclusive of any excise taxes at the retail level which have been or are being separately stated) derived from the motor vehicle transportation business activities of defendants was and is not less than $1,000,000.
(c) At all times hereinafter mentioned, all of the factors necessary to constitute defendants Canal Zone Bus Service, Inc. and Contract Services, Inc. an enterprise engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce, as set forth in sections 3(r) and 3(s) of the Act and as specified in these Findings of Fact, were present.
7. (a) Throughout the period since June 6, 1967, defendants Canal Zone Bus Service, Inc. and Contract Services, Inc. have paid to their employees, referred to in Finding of Fact No. 5 hereof, for workweeks in which they were engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce, wages at rates less than those required to be paid by section 6(a)(1) of the Act.
(b) Throughout the period since June 6, 1967, defendants Canal Zone Bus Service, Inc. and Contract Services, Inc. have paid to their employees for workweeks in which they were employed in an enterprise engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce, referred to in Finding of Fact No. 6 hereof, wages at rates less than those required to be paid by section 6(a)(1) of the Act. 8. (a) Throughout the period since June 6, 1967, defendant Canal Zone Bus Service, Inc. has employed employees referred to in Finding of Fact No. 5 hereof, during workweeks in which they were engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce, for workweeks longer than those prescribed by the Act (namely, for workweeks longer than (1) forty-four (44) hours during the period ending January 31, 1968, (2) forty-two (42) hours during the period from February 1, 1968 to January 31, 1969, and (3) forty (40) hours since February 1, 1969), without compensating said employees for their employment in excess of these prescribed hours at a rate not less than one and one-half times the regular rate or rates at which they were employed.
(b) Throughout the period since June 6, 1967, defendant Canal Zone Bus Service, Inc. has employed employees in an enterprise engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce, referred to in Finding of Fact No. 6 hereof, for workweeks longer than those prescribed by the Act (namely, for workweeks longer than (1) forty-four (44) hours during the period ending January 31, 1968, (2) forty-two (42) hours during the period from February 1, 1968 to January 31, 1969, and (3) forty (40) hours since February 1, 1969), without compensating said employees for their employment in excess of these prescribed hours at a rate not less than one and one-half times the regular rate or rates at which they were employed.
9. As a result of the practices referred to in Findings of Fact numbered 7 and 8 hereof, there are due and owing from defendants to their following named employees unpaid wages for the period beginning June 6, 1967 and ending March 31, 1970, in the amounts set forth opposite their names and in the total sum of $104,337.11 from defendant Canal Zone Bus Service, Inc. and $42,335.34 from defendant Contract Services, Inc., to wit:
DUE FROM CANAL ZONE BUS SERVICE, INC.
--------------------------------------
Name
Total Amount Found Due
----
--------------
Carlos Gonzalez
$193.90
Fernando Abrahams
1278.72
R. Badilla
1147.46
Mayra Badilla
1083.28
Jeanette Erinma
889.12
S. Hamblin
384.00
Paulina Sanhuerza
456.00
Joe Slade
485.60
Marcia Smith
863.60
Argelia Martinez
52.18
Angel L. Cruz
177.30
Fred E. Gray
6.83
Lucien E. Paulus
48.98
Robert Brett
174.83
Nazario Smith
114.30
George E. Curttendam
15.00
Earl P. Breaux
35.10
Mauricio Griffin
138.60
Charlie L. Collins
58.35
Jose Del Carmen Ortega
1432.66
George Brown
2713.93
Celso Galves
2261.71
George Bartley
1899.84
Juan De Dios Montero
2176.17
Alfred Hinds
2383.13
Julio E. Perez
2729.79
Kenneth Roberts
1375.19
Wilton Rose
2518.59
Robert Taylor
1390.14
Edwin Zamora
2757.24
Bolivar Arrocha
484.51
Rogelio Bernard
730.58
Francis Bravo
532.25
Hilario Brown
666.20
J. Brown
912.29
H. Butcher
716.08
R. Camacho
464.50
D. Carrasco
713.55
R. Carrasco
794.62
C. Costas
812.55
R. Castro
588.68
R. De La Torre
789.62
R. De Leon
810.13
M. Delgado
949.18
H. Ferguson
942.57
A. Faskin
830.17
M. Garay
795.65
F. Gonzalez
846.59
R. Herrera
762.70
R. Jaramillo
935.44
A. Meneses
567.07
V. Molinar
991.80
F. Moreno
722.31
O. Penalba
804.64
A. Perry
556.99
H. Phillips
890.89
Z. Ponce
832.47
A. Royce
569.38
E. Samuels
432.40
L. Sosa
864.72
V. Sween
2018.41
F. Tejada
1058.47
B. Valazquez
584.83
C. Vergara
1004.19
Jorge Buchanan
97.50
Leonard Goldburn
76.95
Paulino Ortega
93.32
Aurelio Moreno
84.37
Isidro Paz
91.44
Robert Phillips
25.95
Ernesto Taylor
24.75
Lenny Warte
46.38
R. Espina
243.64
Alejandro Gonzalez
940.48
Joseph Johnson
573.37
F. Maldonado
1860.94
F. Maltez
2011.80
G. Riquelme
476.48
C. Rogers
2173.14
B. Santa Maria
575.10
V. Solano
1476.44
R. Williams
1967.89
M. De Las Casas
33.44
H. Long
196.40
F. Murillo
275.80
T. Saavedra
196.80
E. Barcenas
65.60
Luis Archivald
1969.60
Ch. Belle
2457.77
E. Salazar
274.36
W. Burrell
1522.04
F. Mora
924.58
Laura Rivas
629.85
P. Rose
2184.72
T. Yieri
1852.96
F. Campbell
1299.40
J. Chavanz
1762.46
C. N. Dixon
2030.44
Cecilio Payne
1298.79
R. Aviles
77.70
R. Bethan court
23.33
J. Brown
184.70
F. Cox
153.60
R. De Beuville
92.53
D. Estable
53.20
Feliciano Galvez
100.73
D. Giron
81.00
D. P. Gordon
228.55
R. Guzman
71.95
C. Herrera
399.65
A. Mena
365.40
J. C. Obregon
116.40
R. Penalta
164.35
C. Pinzon
568.83
Pedro Olmedo Quiros
598.70
C. Saucedo
710.40
Gurbancha Sangh
91.00
N. Singh
1997.15
E. Vargas
37.20
P. Torres Vega
90.40
H. Villareal
188.78
L. Waldron
268.53
T. Zamora
197.14
N. Achis
1492.55
S. Arancibia
580.50
D. Barker
569.90
M. E. Batista
36.72
M. R. Batista
2526.01
M. Cueto
2237.29
10. The unpaid wages referred to in Finding of Fact No. 9 hereof represent the difference between the total amount of wages paid by defendants and the total amount of wages which defendants should have paid to each of the employees enumerated in Finding of Fact No. 9 hereof.
DUE FROM CONTRACT SERVICES, INC.
Name
Total Amount Found Due
--------------
Luis Barrios
$1471.50
Vivian Bowen
1578.50
Victor Boyd
244.80
Benjamin Blackman
744.80
Everhard Cuney
324.00
Duncanson Stanley
883.79
Jeronimo de Freitas
1589.20
Luis G. Ellis
273.60
George Green
212.40
Frank Goodin
244.80
Harris Gladstone
1207.30
Davis McCollins
273.60
Carlos McPhan
1598.60
James H. Gabriel
1655.16
Gilberto Murillo
1555.20
Alfred Niles
361.80
Jose Rios
1109.60
Joseph Raid
1570.70
Reginald Taylor
1561.07
Carlos Waldron
250.20
Jose Zorrilla
1546.60
Clarence Blades
497.80
Jorge Bowie
710.80
Albert Branwell
330.50
Stanley Brayan
76.80
Federico Chin
316.50
Ellis Frederick
1215.30
Edwin Edwards
413.30
Harold Ferguson
668.80
Rufus Frederick
645.30
Carlos Dadel
64.00
Jose Gonzalez
64.00
Milton Grant
664.50
Rudolph Griffith
188.80
Joseph Griffith
24.00
Joseph Hall
462.80
Hastan Harris
222.10
Arthur Hughes
185.30
Reginald Johnson
1104.50
Sergio Jurado
864.50
Carlos Herrera
40.00
Hubert Hilton
134.40
Blas Hone
64.00
David Richard
424.40
Kenneth Sealey
1021.70
Reginald Small
706.20
Vincent Stearling
535.20
John Teppin
578.10
Jose F. Bartoli
2093.20
Hortensio Long
1907.34
Mario A. Rodriguez
521.85
Guillermo Meade
2105.60
Justin Tousant
64.00
Courtney Wheatley
64.00
Delano C. Plummer
199.20
George Gonzalez
1970.43
Ana Rita Ramey
442.90
Myra E. Badillo
486.00
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. The Court has jurisdiction of the parties and the subject matter of this cause, pursuant to section 17 of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, as amended (52 Stat. 1060, as amended: 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq.), hereinafter called the Act.
2. During the period since June 6, 1967, defendants employed the persons named in Finding of Fact No. 9 hereof, in an enterprise engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce within the meaning of the Act. Maryland v. Wirtz, 392 U.S. 183, 88 S.Ct. 2017, 20 L.Ed.2d 1020 (1968); Shultz v. Mack Farland Roofing Co., Inc., 413 F.2d 1296 (C.A.5); Wirtz v. Washeterias, S.A., 304 F.Supp. 624 (D.C.Canal Zone, 1968). Defendants also employed many of these said persons in commerce and in the production of goods for commerce within the meaning of the Act. Shultz v. Atlantic Bus Service, Inc., 304 F.Supp. 947 (D.C.Canal Zone, 1969); Wirtz v. Chain Singh, 243 F.Supp. 239 (D.C.Canal Zone, 1965).
3. Defendants Canal Zone Bus Service, Inc. and Contract Services, Inc. have violated the provisions of sections 6 and 15(a)(2) of the Act by paying certain of their employees less than the minimum wage applicable to their employment under the Act.
4. Defendant Canal Zone Bus Service Inc. has violated the provisions of sections 7 and 15(a)(2) of the Act by failing to pay certain of its employees at rates not less than one and one-half times their regular rates of pay for hours worked in excess of the weekly hours prescribed by the Act.
5. Plaintiff is entitled to a judgment enjoining defendants under section 15(a)(2) of the Act. Wirtz v. Jones, 340 F.2d 901 (C.A. 5); Wirtz v. Chain Singh, 243 F.Supp. 239 (D.C.Canal Zone, 1965).
Let judgment in accordance with the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law be entered forthwith.