christensen
et
al
harris
county
et
argued
february
decided
may
fair
labor
standards
act
flsa
permits
political
subdivisions
compensate
employees
overtime
work
granting
compensatory
time
lieu
cash
payment
employees
use
accumulated
compensatory
time
employer
must
pay
cash
compensation
certain
circumstances
fearing
consequences
pay
accrued
compensatory
time
harris
county
adopted
policy
requiring
employees
schedule
time
order
reduce
amount
accrued
time
petitioners
county
deputy
sheriffs
sued
claiming
flsa
permit
employer
compel
employee
use
compensatory
time
absence
agreement
permitting
employer
district
granted
petitioners
summary
judgment
entered
declaratory
judgment
policy
violated
flsa
fifth
circuit
reversed
holding
flsa
speak
issue
thus
prohibit
county
implementing
policy
held
nothing
flsa
implementing
regulations
prohibits
public
employer
compelling
use
compensatory
time
petitioners
claim
implicitly
prohibits
compelled
use
compensatory
time
absence
agreement
unpersuasive
proposition
statute
limits
thing
done
particular
mode
includes
negative
mode
raleigh
gaston
reid
wall
resolve
case
petitioners
favor
section
provides
employee
requests
use
compensatory
time
must
permitted
unless
employer
operations
unduly
disrupted
negative
inference
drawn
employer
may
deny
request
reason
provided
section
simply
ensures
employee
receive
timely
benefit
overtime
work
flsa
nearby
provisions
reflect
similar
concern
bottom
best
reading
flsa
ensures
liquidation
compensatory
time
says
nothing
restricting
employer
efforts
require
employees
use
time
statute
silent
issue
county
policy
entirely
compatible
petitioners
requires
prove
county
violated
two
features
flsa
support
interpretation
employers
permitted
decrease
number
hours
employees
work
employers
also
may
cash
accumulated
compensatory
time
paying
employee
regular
hourly
wage
hour
accrued
county
policy
merely
involves
steps
department
labor
opinion
letter
taking
position
employer
may
compel
use
compensatory
time
employee
agreed
advance
practice
entitled
deference
chevron
natural
resources
defense
council
interpretations
opinion
letters
like
interpretations
contained
policy
statements
agency
manuals
enforcement
guidelines
lack
force
law
warrant
deference
entitled
respect
extent
persuasive
skidmore
swift
case
chevron
deference
apply
agency
interpretation
contained
regulation
nothing
department
labor
regulation
even
arguably
requires
employer
compelled
use
policy
must
included
agreement
deference
agency
interpretation
regulation
warranted
auer
robbins
regulation
language
ambiguous
case
pp
affirmed
thomas
delivered
opinion
rehnquist
kennedy
souter
joined
scalia
joined
except
part
iii
souter
filed
concurring
opinion
scalia
filed
opinion
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
stevens
filed
dissenting
opinion
ginsburg
breyer
joined
breyer
filed
dissenting
opinion
ginsburg
joined
edward
christensen
et
petitioners
harris
county
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
fifth
circuit
may
justice
thomas
delivered
opinion
fair
labor
standards
act
flsa
stat
amended
et
seq
ed
supp
iii
political
subdivisions
may
compensate
employees
overtime
granting
compensatory
time
comp
time
entitles
take
time
work
full
pay
employees
use
accumulated
compensatory
time
employer
obligated
pay
cash
compensation
certain
circumstances
fearing
fiscal
consequences
pay
accrued
compensatory
time
harris
county
adopted
policy
requiring
employees
schedule
time
order
reduce
amount
accrued
compensatory
time
employees
harris
county
sheriff
department
sued
claiming
flsa
prohibits
policy
appeals
rejected
claim
finding
nothing
flsa
implementing
regulations
prohibits
employer
compelling
use
compensatory
time
affirm
flsa
generally
provides
hourly
employees
work
excess
hours
per
week
must
compensated
excess
hours
rate
less
times
regular
hourly
wage
although
requirement
initially
apply
employers
congress
amended
flsa
subject
political
subdivisions
constraints
first
limited
basis
see
fair
labor
standards
amendments
pub
stat
extending
flsa
certain
categories
state
local
employees
broadly
see
fair
labor
standards
amendments
pub
stat
extending
flsa
state
local
employees
save
elected
officials
staffs
political
subdivisions
however
feel
full
force
latter
extension
decision
garcia
san
antonio
metropolitan
transit
authority
overruled
holding
national
league
cities
usery
flsa
constitutionally
restrain
traditional
governmental
functions
months
following
garcia
congress
acted
mitigate
effects
applying
flsa
political
subdivisions
passing
fair
labor
standards
amendments
pub
stat
see
generally
moreau
klevenhagen
amendments
permit
political
subdivisions
compensate
employees
overtime
granting
compensatory
time
rate
hours
every
hour
worked
see
provide
form
compensation
employer
must
arrive
agreement
understanding
employees
compensatory
time
granted
instead
cash
cfr
flsa
expressly
regulates
aspects
accrual
preservation
compensatory
time
example
flsa
provides
employer
must
honor
employee
request
use
compensatory
time
within
reasonable
period
time
following
request
long
use
compensatory
time
unduly
disrupt
employer
operations
cfr
flsa
also
caps
number
compensatory
time
hours
employee
may
accrue
employee
reaches
maximum
employer
must
pay
cash
compensation
additional
overtime
hours
worked
addition
flsa
permits
employer
time
cancel
cash
accrued
compensatory
time
hours
paying
employee
cash
compensation
unused
compensatory
time
cfr
flsa
entitles
employee
cash
payment
accrued
compensatory
time
remaining
upon
termination
employment
petitioners
deputy
sheriffs
employed
respondents
harris
county
texas
sheriff
tommy
thomas
collectively
harris
county
undisputed
petitioners
individually
agreed
accept
compensatory
time
lieu
cash
compensation
overtime
petitioners
accumulated
compensatory
time
harris
county
became
concerned
lacked
resources
pay
monetary
compensation
employees
worked
overtime
reaching
statutory
cap
compensatory
time
accrual
employees
left
jobs
sizable
reserves
accrued
time
result
county
began
looking
way
reduce
accumulated
compensatory
time
wrote
department
labor
wage
hour
division
asking
whether
sheriff
may
schedule
employees
use
take
compensatory
time
brief
petitioners
acting
administrator
division
replied
position
public
employer
may
schedule
nonexempt
employees
use
accrued
flsa
compensatory
time
directed
prior
agreement
specifically
provides
provision
absent
agreement
position
neither
statute
regulations
permit
employer
require
employee
use
accrued
compensatory
time
opinion
letter
dept
labor
wage
hour
div
wl
opinion
letter
receiving
letter
harris
county
implemented
policy
employees
supervisor
sets
maximum
number
compensatory
hours
may
accumulated
employee
stock
hours
approaches
maximum
employee
advised
maximum
asked
take
steps
reduce
accumulated
compensatory
time
employee
voluntarily
supervisor
may
order
employee
use
compensatory
time
specified
times
petitioners
sued
claiming
county
policy
violates
flsa
requires
employer
reasonably
accommodate
employee
requests
use
compensatory
time
provides
exclusive
means
utilizing
accrued
time
absence
agreement
understanding
permitting
method
district
agreed
granting
summary
judgment
petitioners
entering
declaratory
judgment
county
policy
violated
flsa
moreau
harris
county
supp
sd
tex
appeals
fifth
circuit
reversed
holding
flsa
speak
issue
thus
prohibit
county
implementing
compensatory
time
policy
moreau
harris
county
judge
dennis
concurred
part
dissented
part
concluding
employer
compel
employee
use
compensatory
time
unless
employee
agreed
arrangement
advance
granted
certiorari
courts
appeals
divided
ii
parties
amicus
curiae
concede
nothing
flsa
expressly
prohibits
state
subdivision
thereof
compelling
employees
utilize
accrued
compensatory
time
petitioners
however
contend
flsa
implicitly
prohibits
practice
absence
agreement
understanding
authorizing
compelled
title
provides
employee
accrued
compensatory
time
requested
use
compensatory
time
shall
permitted
employee
employer
use
time
within
reasonable
period
making
request
use
compensatory
time
unduly
disrupt
operations
public
agency
petitioners
rely
upon
canon
expressio
unius
est
exclusio
alterius
contending
express
grant
control
employees
use
compensatory
time
subject
limitation
regarding
undue
disruptions
workplace
operations
implies
methods
spending
compensatory
time
find
reading
unpersuasive
accept
proposition
hen
statute
limits
thing
done
particular
mode
includes
negative
mode
raleigh
gaston
reid
wall
canon
resolve
case
petitioners
favor
thing
done
defined
expenditure
compensatory
time
petitioners
instead
properly
read
minimal
guarantee
employee
able
make
use
compensatory
time
requests
use
proper
expressio
unius
inference
employer
may
least
absence
agreement
deny
employee
request
use
compensatory
time
reason
provided
canon
application
simply
prohibit
employer
telling
employee
take
benefits
compensatory
time
scheduling
time
work
full
pay
words
viewed
context
overall
statutory
scheme
better
read
setting
forth
exclusive
method
compensatory
time
used
setting
safeguard
ensure
employee
receive
timely
compensation
working
overtime
section
guarantees
minimum
employee
get
use
compensatory
time
take
time
work
full
pay
unless
disrupt
employer
operations
precisely
concern
ensuring
employees
timely
liquidate
compensatory
time
secretary
labor
identified
regulations
governing
compensatory
time
used
means
avoid
statutory
overtime
compensation
employee
right
use
compensatory
time
earned
must
coerced
accept
compensatory
time
employer
realistically
good
faith
expect
able
grant
within
reasonable
period
making
request
use
time
cfr
reading
confirmed
nearby
provisions
flsa
reflect
similar
concern
ensuring
employee
receive
timely
benefit
overtime
work
example
provides
workers
may
accrue
hours
compensatory
time
depending
upon
nature
job
see
also
conditioning
employer
ability
provide
compensatory
time
upon
employee
accruing
compensatory
time
excess
limits
section
helps
guarantee
employees
accrue
amounts
compensatory
time
reasonably
use
employer
need
protection
free
time
reduce
number
hours
accrued
exchanging
cash
payment
halting
accrual
compensatory
time
paying
cash
compensation
overtime
work
cfr
thus
like
reflects
concern
employees
receive
timely
benefit
exchange
overtime
work
moreover
petitioners
view
compensatory
time
exception
enacted
congress
wake
garcia
become
nullity
employees
refuse
use
compensatory
time
reach
statutory
maximums
accrual
petitioners
position
convert
shield
sword
forcing
employers
pay
cash
compensation
instead
providing
compensatory
time
employees
work
overtime
bottom
think
better
reading
imposes
restriction
upon
employer
efforts
prohibit
use
compensatory
time
employees
request
provision
says
nothing
restricting
employer
efforts
require
employees
use
compensatory
time
statute
silent
issue
harris
county
policy
entirely
compatible
petitioners
required
prove
harris
county
violated
interpretation
one
prohibit
employers
forcing
employees
use
compensatory
time
finds
support
two
features
flsa
first
employers
remain
free
flsa
decrease
number
hours
employees
work
employer
may
tell
employee
take
afternoon
day
even
entire
week
cf
barrentine
best
freight
system
flsa
designed
ensure
employee
covered
act
protected
evil
overwork
internal
quotation
marks
emphasis
omitted
second
flsa
explicitly
permits
employer
cash
accumulated
compensatory
time
paying
employee
regular
hourly
wage
hour
accrued
cfr
thus
flsa
employer
free
require
employee
take
time
work
employer
also
free
use
money
paid
wages
cash
accrued
compensatory
time
compelled
use
compensatory
time
challenged
case
merely
involves
steps
make
little
sense
interpret
make
combination
two
steps
unlawful
independently
iii
attempt
avoid
conclusion
flsa
prohibit
compelled
use
compensatory
time
petitioners
contend
defer
department
labor
opinion
letter
takes
position
employer
may
compel
use
compensatory
time
employee
agreed
advance
practice
specifically
argue
agency
opinion
letter
entitled
deference
decision
chevron
natural
resources
defense
council
chevron
held
must
give
effect
agency
regulation
containing
reasonable
interpretation
ambiguous
statute
however
confront
interpretation
contained
opinion
letter
one
arrived
example
formal
adjudication
rulemaking
interpretations
opinion
letters
like
interpretations
contained
policy
statements
agency
manuals
enforcement
guidelines
lack
force
law
warrant
deference
see
reno
koray
internal
agency
guideline
subject
rigors
administrative
procedur
act
including
public
notice
comment
entitled
deference
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
eeoc
arabian
american
oil
interpretative
guidelines
receive
chevron
deference
martin
occupational
safety
health
review
interpretative
rules
enforcement
guidelines
entitled
deference
norms
derive
exercise
secretary
delegated
lawmaking
powers
see
generally
davis
pierce
administrative
law
treatise
ed
instead
interpretations
contained
formats
opinion
letters
entitled
respect
decision
skidmore
swift
extent
interpretations
power
persuade
ibid
see
arabian
american
oil
supra
explained
find
unpersuasive
agency
interpretation
statute
issue
case
course
framework
deference
set
forth
chevron
apply
agency
interpretation
contained
regulation
case
department
labor
regulation
address
issue
compelled
compensatory
time
regulation
provides
agreement
understanding
employer
employee
may
include
provisions
governing
preservation
use
cashing
compensatory
time
long
provisions
consistent
cfr
emphasis
added
nothing
regulation
even
arguably
requires
employer
compelled
use
policy
must
included
agreement
text
regulation
indicates
command
permissive
mandatory
seeking
overcome
regulation
obvious
meaning
asserts
agency
opinion
letter
interpreting
regulation
given
deference
decision
auer
robbins
auer
held
agency
interpretation
regulation
entitled
deference
see
also
bowles
seminole
rock
sand
auer
deference
warranted
language
regulation
ambiguous
regulation
case
however
ambiguous
plainly
permissive
defer
agency
position
permit
agency
guise
interpreting
regulation
create
de
facto
new
regulation
regulation
ambiguous
issue
compelled
compensatory
time
auer
deference
unwarranted
noted
relevant
statutory
provision
expressly
implicitly
prohibits
harris
county
pursuing
policy
forcing
employees
utilize
compensatory
time
opinion
letter
siding
petitioners
department
labor
opined
position
neither
statute
regulations
permit
employer
require
employee
use
accrued
compensatory
time
opinion
letter
emphasis
added
view
exactly
backwards
unless
flsa
prohibits
respondents
adopting
policy
petitioners
show
harris
county
violated
flsa
flsa
contains
prohibition
judgment
appeals
affirmed
ordered
edward
christensen
et
petitioners
harris
county
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
fifth
circuit
may
justice
souter
concurring
join
opinion
assumption
foreclose
reading
fair
labor
standards
act
allows
secretary
labor
issue
regulations
limiting
forced
use
edward
christensen
et
petitioners
harris
county
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
fifth
circuit
may
justice
scalia
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
join
judgment
opinion
except
part
iii
declines
give
effect
position
department
labor
case
opinion
letter
entitled
skidmore
deference
see
skidmore
swift
skidmore
deference
authoritative
agency
views
anachronism
dating
era
declined
give
agency
interpretations
including
interpretive
regulations
opposed
legislative
rules
authoritative
effect
see
eeoc
arabian
american
oil
scalia
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
former
judicial
attitude
accounts
provision
administrative
procedure
act
exempted
interpretative
rules
since
authoritative
requirements
applicable
rulemaking
see
era
came
end
watershed
decision
chevron
natural
resources
defense
council
established
principle
may
substitute
construction
statutory
provision
reasonable
interpretation
made
administrator
agency
chevron
fact
involved
interpretive
regulation
rationale
case
limited
context
power
administrative
agency
administer
congressionally
created
program
necessarily
requires
formulation
policy
making
rules
fill
gap
left
implicitly
explicitly
congress
quoting
morton
ruiz
quite
appropriately
therefore
accorded
chevron
deference
agency
regulations
authoritative
agency
positions
set
forth
variety
formats
see
ins
adjudication
nationsbank
variable
annuity
life
ins
letter
comptroller
currency
pension
benefit
guaranty
corporation
ltv
decision
pension
benefit
guaranty
restore
pension
benefit
plan
young
community
nutrition
institute
food
drug
administration
longstanding
interpretation
statute
reflected
notice
published
federal
register
view
therefore
position
county
action
case
unlawful
unless
permitted
terms
agreement
sheriff
department
employees
warrants
chevron
deference
represents
authoritative
view
department
labor
fact
appears
single
opinion
letter
signed
acting
administrator
wage
hour
division
might
alone
persuade
occupies
status
solicitor
general
appearing
amicus
action
filed
brief
cosigned
solicitor
labor
represents
position
set
forth
opinion
letter
position
secretary
labor
alone
even
without
existence
opinion
letter
view
entitle
position
chevron
deference
said
case
involving
agency
interpretation
regulations
applies
equally
view
agency
interpretation
governing
statute
petitioners
complain
secretary
interpretation
comes
us
form
legal
brief
circumstances
case
make
unworthy
deference
secretary
position
sense
post
hoc
rationalizatio
advanced
agency
seeking
defend
past
agency
action
attack
bowen
georgetown
univ
hospital
simply
reason
suspect
interpretation
reflect
agency
fair
considered
judgment
matter
question
auer
robbins
nonetheless
join
judgment
reasons
set
forth
part
ii
opinion
secretary
position
seem
reasonable
interpretation
statute
edward
christensen
et
petitioners
harris
county
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
fifth
circuit
may
justice
stevens
justice
ginsburg
justice
breyer
join
dissenting
disagreement
parties
concerns
scope
exception
general
rule
appropriate
begin
correct
identification
relevant
general
rule
rule
gives
employees
protected
fair
labor
standards
act
statutory
right
compensation
overtime
work
payable
cash
whether
work
private
sector
economy
public
sector
ed
supp
iii
congress
enacted
exception
general
rule
permits
political
subdivisions
use
compensatory
time
instead
cash
compensation
overtime
exception
however
applicable
unless
public
employer
first
arrives
agreement
employees
substitute
type
compensation
cash
cfr
read
statute
employer
right
impose
compensatory
overtime
payment
upon
employees
except
accordance
terms
agreement
authorizing
use
stumbles
treats
limited
conditional
exception
though
relevant
general
rule
begins
opinion
correctly
asserting
public
employers
may
compensate
employees
overtime
granting
compensatory
time
comp
time
entitles
take
time
work
full
pay
ante
reaches
bottom
second
page
however
acknowledges
appeared
relevant
general
rule
really
exception
employees
basic
right
paid
cash
judgment
fact
employer
may
lawfully
make
use
comp
time
without
prior
agreement
affected
employees
critical
importance
answering
question
whether
particular
method
using
form
noncash
compensation
may
imposed
employees
without
consent
consent
condition
without
employer
qualify
exception
general
rule
seems
clear
agreement
must
encompass
way
compensatory
time
may
used
effort
avoid
addressing
basic
point
mistakenly
characterizes
petitioners
central
argument
turning
upon
canon
expressio
unius
est
exclusio
according
petitioners
amicus
curiae
contend
employees
granted
power
act
use
compensatory
time
subject
solely
employers
ability
make
employees
wait
reasonable
time
using
methods
spending
compensatory
time
precluded
ante
concludes
expressio
unius
help
petitioners
thing
done
prescribed
statute
things
excluded
simply
guarantee
employees
allowed
make
use
compensatory
time
upon
request
rather
promise
employees
able
choose
subject
reasonable
time
limitation
spend
ibid
description
debate
misses
primary
thrust
petitioners
position
implies
contend
employers
generally
must
afford
employees
essentially
unlimited
use
accrued
comp
time
statute
point
rather
rules
regarding
availability
use
comp
time
must
contained
within
agreement
thing
done
act
parties
come
terms
done
respect
use
comp
time
county
may
unilaterally
force
expenditure
thus
likewise
mistaken
insistence
petitioners
reading
comp
time
exception
become
nullity
employees
forc
employers
pay
cash
compensation
instead
providing
compensatory
time
overtime
work
ante
quite
contrary
employers
forced
either
abide
arrangements
agreed
comply
basic
statutory
requirement
overtime
compensation
payable
cash
moreover
points
ante
even
absent
agreement
way
comp
time
may
used
employers
may
time
require
employees
cash
accumulated
comp
time
thereby
readily
avoiding
forced
payment
comp
time
employees
may
accrue
cfr
neither
said
congress
somehow
assumed
right
force
employees
use
accumulated
comp
time
implied
term
comp
time
agreements
congress
specifically
contemplated
employees
might
well
reach
statutory
maximum
accrued
comp
time
requiring
statutory
maximum
reached
employers
must
compensate
employees
preferred
form
cash
every
hour
limit
finally
without
significance
present
case
government
department
responsible
statute
enforcement
shares
understanding
meaning
indeed
department
labor
made
position
clear
county
response
direct
question
posed
county
decided
agency
advice
notwithstanding
implement
policy
nonetheless
department
labor
explained
public
employer
may
schedule
nonexempt
employees
use
accrued
flsa
compensatory
time
directed
prior
agreement
specifically
provides
provision
employees
knowingly
voluntarily
agreed
provision
absent
agreement
position
neither
statute
regulations
permit
employer
require
employee
use
accrued
compensatory
time
opinion
letter
dept
labor
wage
hour
div
wl
department
emphasized
suggest
policies
forbidden
statute
regulations
rather
judgment
simply
accordance
basic
rule
governing
compensatory
time
set
statutory
regulatory
scheme
policies
may
pursued
solely
according
parties
agreement
reason
believe
department
opinion
anything
thoroughly
considered
consistently
observed
unquestionably
merits
respect
see
skidmore
swift
end
understand
difficult
parties
come
agreement
term
employment
antecedent
question
whether
compensatory
time
may
used
state
employers
enjoy
substantial
bargaining
power
negotiations
employees
regulation
agreements
governing
availability
use
compensatory
time
essentially
informal
parties
wish
see
cfr
said
employers
retain
ability
cash
accrued
leave
time
simple
step
method
department
labor
years
ago
suggested
county
pursue
achieve
precisely
outcome
county
along
claimed
wants
respectfully
dissent
edward
christensen
et
petitioners
harris
county
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
fifth
circuit
may
justice
breyer
justice
ginsburg
joins
dissenting
justice
scalia
may
well
right
position
department
labor
set
forth
brief
letter
authoritative
agency
view
warrants
deference
chevron
natural
resources
defense
council
ante
opinion
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
object
majority
citing
skidmore
swift
instead
disagree
justice
scalia
statement
calls
skidmore
deference
anachronism
ante
skidmore
made
clear
courts
may
pay
particular
attention
views
expert
agency
represent
specialized
experience
justice
jackson
wrote
views
may
possess
power
persuade
even
lack
power
control
skidmore
supra
chevron
made
relevant
change
simply
focused
upon
additional
separate
legal
reason
deferring
certain
agency
determinations
namely
congress
delegated
agency
legal
authority
make
determinations
see
chevron
supra
extent
may
circumstances
deference
inapplicable
one
doubt
congress
actually
intended
delegate
interpretive
authority
agency
ambiguity
chevron
presumptively
leave
agency
resolution
believe
skidmore
nonetheless
retains
legal
vitality
statutes
serve
human
purposes
called
courts
continue
pay
particular
attention
appropriate
cases
views
expert
agencies
agree
justice
stevens
thoroughly
considered
consistently
observed
agency
views
particularly
rather
technical
case
one
meri
respect
ante
dissenting
opinion
course
also
agree
justice
stevens
reasons
sets
forth
ante
labor
department
position
matter
eminently
reasonable
hence
persuasive
whether
one
views
decision
chevron
lens
skidmore
footnotes
agreement
understanding
need
formally
reached
memorialized
writing
instead
arrived
informally
employee
works
overtime
knowing
employer
rewards
overtime
compensatory
time
see
cfr
compare
collins
lobdell
upholding
employer
policy
compelling
compensatory
time
use
heaton
moore
striking
policy
compelling
compensatory
time
use
cert
denied
sub
nom
schriro
heaton
granted
certiorari
question
hether
public
agency
governed
compensatory
time
provisions
fair
labor
standards
act
may
absent
preexisting
agreement
require
employees
use
accrued
compensatory
time
decide
case
assumption
agreement
understanding
exists
employer
employees
issue
compelled
use
compensatory
time
justice
stevens
asserts
parties
never
make
argument
see
post
dissenting
opinion
although
petitioners
fail
make
arguments
latin
believe
fair
reading
briefs
reveals
reliance
upon
expressio
unius
canon
see
brief
amicus
curiae
congress
identified
one
circumstance
employer
may
exercise
measure
control
employee
requests
use
compensatory
time
employer
must
allow
use
within
reasonable
period
time
except
use
unduly
disrupt
employer
operations
congress
intended
employers
exercise
unilateral
control
use
compensatory
time
respects
well
presumably
provided
reply
brief
petitioners
contending
flsa
explicitly
provides
methods
reducing
compensatory
time
thus
means
may
used
justice
stevens
dispute
argument
fact
expressly
endorses
half
see
post
employer
free
cash
compensatory
time
instead
justice
stevens
claims
stumbl
failing
identify
relevant
general
rule
employees
statutory
right
compensation
overtime
work
payable
cash
post
fail
general
rule
relevant
case
parties
case
agreed
compensatory
time
provided
lieu
cash
thus
general
requirement
cash
compensation
supplanted
petitioners
assert
requirement
cash
compensation
relevant
analogy
claim
employer
compel
compensatory
time
use
compensatory
time
treated
like
employee
cash
bank
exclusive
control
employee
analogy
wholly
inapt
terms
flsa
flsa
grants
significant
control
employer
accrued
compensatory
time
example
employer
free
buy
compensatory
time
time
providing
cash
compensation
cfr
additionally
employer
free
deny
request
use
compensatory
time
use
unduly
disrupt
employer
operations
cfr
cash
analogy
therefore
directly
undermined
unambiguous
provisions
statute
footnotes
comprehend
justice
breyer
contention
post
dissenting
opinion
skidmore
deference
special
respect
one
gives
interpretive
views
expert
agency
responsible
administering
statute
anachronism
may
apply
circumstances
deference
inapplicable
deference
inapplicable
three
reasons
statute
unambiguous
room
administrative
interpretation
interpretation
made
personnel
agency
responsible
administering
statute
interpretation
made
personnel
authoritative
sense
represent
official
position
expert
agency
reasons
preclude
skidmore
deference
well
specific
example
inapplicability
chevron
justice
breyer
posits
one
doubt
congress
actually
intended
delegate
interpretive
authority
agency
post
appears
assume
finding
statute
ambiguous
must
ask
addition
invoke
chevron
deference
whether
congress
intended
ambiguity
resolved
administering
agency
chevron
establishes
presumption
ambiguities
resolved
within
bounds
reasonable
interpretation
administering
agency
implausibility
congress
leaving
highly
significant
issue
unaddressed
thus
delegating
resolution
administering
agency
assuredly
one
factors
considered
determining
whether
ambiguity
see
mci
telecommunications
american
telephone
telegraph
ambiguity
established
consequences
chevron
attach
footnotes
must
noted
neither
petitioners
brief
brief
amicus
curiae
actually
relies
upon
canon
indeed
sole
mention
either
brief
petitioners
statement
case
petitioners
refer
single
sentence
argument
made
appeals
eighth
circuit
heaton
moore
rejecting
policy
absent
agreement
effect
cert
denied
schriro
heaton
add
fully
agree
justice
breyer
comments
chevron
natural
resources
defense
council
see
post