Searching over 5,500,000 cases.

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.


February 6, 1976


The opinion of the court was delivered by: VANARTSDALEN



 1. Plaintiff, Robert W. Bailey, Jr., an individual residing in Blue Bell, Pennsylvania, is a pilot licensed by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to engage in pilotage on the Delaware Bay and River.

 2. The Defendant Pilots' Association for the Bay and River Delaware is an unincorporated association with an office in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, whose members engage in the providing of pilotage services in interstate commerce.

 3. The purpose of the Association is to provide a convenient means of arranging pilotage services and for collecting fees.

 4. The individually named defendants were, at the time this action was commenced, officers and/or directors of the Association.

 5. Pennsylvania law requires, inter alia, that in order to become a licensed pilot, a person must serve as an apprentice on a pilot boat for four years. 55 P.S. § 41 et seq.

 6. Plaintiff successfully applied to the Pennsylvania Navigation Commission to become an apprentice and, on July 1, 1968, executed an Agreement of Indenture to his father, Robert W. Bailey, Sr., a first-class pilot, and began serving his apprenticeship on the M/V Philadelphia, a pilot boat owned and operated by the Defendant Association.

 7. During his periods of duty on the M/V Philadelphia, the Plaintiff was under the control and direction of the Defendant Association, its members, agents, or employees.

 8. The Plaintiff was paid Five Dollars ($5.00) per month by the Association. Neither the Plaintiff nor the Association contemplated any other compensation to the Plaintiff at the outset of his apprenticeship. The Five Dollars ($5.00) per month was paid to Plaintiff during his time off the M/V Philadelphia during 1971 when he made trips with pilots on commercial vessels.

 9. While an apprentice pilot, the Plaintiff, served, with certain exceptions for which no recovery is sought, one week on-duty and one week off-duty on the M/V Philadelphia. Plaintiff alternated six hours on-duty and six hours off-duty over the course of each week spent on the boat.

 10. Plaintiff's duties during the first three years of his apprenticeship were primarily as a motor launch operator -- ferrying pilots from the M/V Philadelphia to the ships, and a deckman -- keeping watch and performing general seaman, deck-hand chores on the boat.

 12. As an apprentice, the Plaintiff was counted as a member of the crew toward the legal requirement for a full crew complement.

 13. The Plaintiff received minimal supervision and instructions from the Association or its members during his apprenticeship relevant to the duties and skills of a licensed river pilot.

 14. The Plaintiff was given time off from serving on the M/V Philadelphia to study for his federal and state licenses. No recovery is sought for those periods.

 15. The Plaintiff learned the duties and skills of a river pilot by making trips up and down the river accompanying licensed pilots on commercial vessels. The Plaintiff made no trips on the river during his on-duty hours on the M/V Philadelphia, nor did the Association arrange for those trips as part of its apprenticeship program.

 16. There was some educational benefit to the Plaintiff from serving on the M/V Philadelphia, service on a pilot boat was necessary to become licensed by the Commonwealth and the M/V Philadelphia was the only boat available for such a purpose. Nevertheless, the Association derived the primary, immediate and substantial benefit from the Plaintiff's work on the pilot boat.

 17. The Association operates the M/V Philadelphia for a twofold purpose: (1) as a way station for the pilots in going to and coming from ships; (2) to provide an opportunity for apprentices to fulfill the statutory requirements to become a licensed pilot.

 18. The Association was not required by law to accept or train apprentices.

 19. The Association owns and operates a shore facility at Lewes, Delaware, a lighthouse, which is presently inadequate to fulfill the functions of the M/V Philadelphia. An eventual conversion to using a shore station might be more economical than using the pilot boat.

 20. The possible application of the minimum wage to the apprentices was discussed by the officers of the Association on several ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.