(a) Another large category of employees covered as “engaged in commerce” is comprised of employees performing the work involved in the maintenance, repair, or improvement of existing instrumentalities of commerce. (See the cases cited in footnote 28 to § 776.9. See also the discussion of coverage of employees engaged in building and construction work, in subpart B of this part.) Typical illustrations of instrumentalities of commerce include railroads, highways, city streets, pipe lines, telephone lines, electrical transmission lines, rivers, streams, or other waterways over which interstate or foreign commerce more or less regularly moves; airports; railroad, bus, truck, or steamship terminals; telephone exchanges, radio and television stations, post offices and express offices; bridges and ferries carrying traffic moving in interstate or foreign commerce (even though within a single State); bays, harbors, piers, wharves and docks used for shipping between a State and points outside; dams, dikes, revetments and levees which directly facilitate the uninterrupted movement of commerce by enhancing or improving the usefulness of waterways, railways, and highways through control of water depth, channels or flow in streams or through control of flood waters; warehouses or distribution depots devoted to the receipt and shipment of goods in interstate or foreign commerce; ships, vehicles, and aircraft regularly used in transportation of persons or goods in commerce; and similar fixed or movable facilities on which the flow of interstate and foreign commerce depends.
(b) It is well settled that the work of employees involved in the maintenance, repair, or improvement of such existing instrumentalities of commerce is so closely related to interstate or foreign commerce as to be in practice and in legal contemplation a part of it. Included among the employees who are thus “engaged in commerce” within the meaning of the Act are employees of railroads, telephone companies, and similar instrumentalities who are engaged in maintenance-of-way work;
Davis v. Rockton & Rion R.R., 65 F. Supp. 67 affirmed in 159 F. 2d 291 (C.A. 4); North Shore Corp. v. Barnett, 143 F. 2d 172 (C.A. 5); Palmer v. Howard, 12 Lab. Cas. (CCH) par. 63, 756 (W.D. Tenn.); Williams v. Atlantic Coast Lines R.R. Co., 1 W.M. Cases 289 (E.D. N.C. 1940), 2 Labor Cases (CCH) par. 18, 564.
(c) On the other hand, work which is less immediately related to the functioning of instrumentalities of commerce than is the case in the foregoing examples may be too remote from interstate or foreign commerce to establish coverage on the ground that the employee performing it is “engaged in commerce.” This has been held true, for example, of a cook preparing meals for workmen who are repairing tracks over which interstate trains operate,
McLeod v. Threlkeld, 319 U.S. 491.
(d) There are other situations in which employees are engaged “in commerce” and therefore within the coverage of the Act because they contribute directly to the movement of commerce by providing goods or facilities to be used or consumed by instrumentalities of commerce in the direct furtherance of their activities of transportation, communication, transmission, or other movement in interstate or foreign commerce. Thus, for example, employees are considered engaged “in commerce” where they provide to railroads, radio stations, airports, telephone exchanges, or other similar instrumentalities of commerce such things as electric energy,
New Mexico Public Service Co. v. Engel, 145 F. 2d 636 (C.A. 10); Walling v. Connecticut Co., 154 F. 2d 552 (C.A. 2).