By: Ty Hyderally, Esq. and Kenny Delgado

March 28, 2025

The Third Circuit Court of Appeals recently affirmed a District Court ruling that travel during work hours from one location of work to another must be compensated. The decision in United State Department of Labor v. Nursing Home Care Management Inc., guarantees that travel for the purpose of work fits within the Fair Labor Standards Act as work time, as long as that travel is from one location of work to another.

In this case, the DOL sued on behalf of home health aids who were not compensated for travel between clients’ homes. The employees in this case were home health aids who brought a complaint to the DOL against their employer because they were not compensated for necessary travel between the homes where they serviced.   The District Court judge granted summary judgment on the basis that the FLSA ensured payment during travel time to employees, citing both case law and the language of Code of Federal Regulations related to travel and compensation. The employer appealed citing the Portal-to-Portal Act from 1947 which relieved employers of a duty to compensate employees for travel prior to clocking in and beginning their workdays and arguing that the travel was not a necessary part of the job.

The Appeals Court agreed with District Court that they home health aides should be compensated for travel related to their work duties.  The Court noted that the travel that must be compensated is limited to travel during work duty and does not include time going home from a job site or any time that can be used for personal reasons. The Court clearly states that an employee must only be compensated for travel that is necessary and “integral and indispensable.”  This means that travel from job site to job site, travel to deliver work materials and travel to a location for a required uniform or safety equipment change should be compensated. The Defendants in this case argued that the travel time was akin to a break, however that is not congruent with previous Court decisions regarding the FLSA. Rather the Court noted that short breaks also should be paid, and that travel is not a break but a part of the job.

In this case, the employer argued that travel is not a listed duty of the employee, and that travel is not a part of the employees’ productive work functions. The Defendant argued that home health aides are “employed to perform. . . feeding, bathing, providing medication and dressing clients.” The Court again rejected the argument saying that common sense indicates that the home health aids must travel to different locations to do their jobs and that travel is integral to the premise of in-home healthcare.

With this decision, the Courts provide more guidance on what makes for necessary travel and places the burden on employers to ensure that they are properly compensating their employees for work. If you believe that you have been denied appropriate wages or if you have any questions regarding your rights as an employee, you should seek out an experienced attorney who concentrates in employment law. Our firm has been concentrating in employment law for over twenty-two (22) years!

En nuestra firma hablamos español. This blog is for informational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice and may not reasonably be relied upon as such. If you face a legal issue, you should consult a qualified attorney for independent legal advice regarding your particular set of facts. This blog may constitute attorney advertising. This blog is not intended to communicate with anyone in a state or other jurisdiction where such a blog may fail to comply with all laws and ethical rules of that state or jurisdiction.