Top 10 similar words or synonyms for smithkline_beecham

glaxosmithkline    0.872368

astrazeneca    0.867048

sanofi    0.853341

schering_plough    0.853129

bristol_myers_squibb    0.849746

abbott_laboratories    0.843399

pfizer    0.840457

ciba_geigy    0.837957

sanofi_aventis    0.832609

novartis    0.831800

Top 30 analogous words or synonyms for smithkline_beecham

Article Example
Christopher v. SmithKline Beecham Corp. The United States District Court for the District of Arizona granted a judgment in favor of GlaxoSmithKline. After the Department of Labor filed an "amicus" in a related case in the Second Circuit, they appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in California, which affirmed the lower court's decision. The plaintiffs then appealed to the Supreme Court.
Christopher v. SmithKline Beecham Corp. Breyer J filed a dissenting opinion, in which Ginsburg J, Sotomayor J, and Kagan J joined.
Christopher v. SmithKline Beecham Corp. Michael Christopher and Frank Buchanan worked for GlaxoSmithKline, and claimed overtime pay under the Fair Labor Standards Act. They argued they were employees under 29 USC §207(a), while GSK contended they were acting ‘in the capacity of outside salesman’ under §213(a). In turn 29 CFR §541.500 defined ‘outside salesman’ as ‘any employee’ whose duty was ‘making sales’ under §203(k) which said that included ‘any sale, exchange, contract to sell’ and so on. Christopher and Buchanan were sales representatives for around four years from 2003, who marketed to physicians to buy the company’s products. They spent 40 hours a week calling physicians, and another 10 to 20 hours attending events and performing other miscellaneous tasks. Their pay included a salary and bonus pay, based on performance in selling. In a class action lawsuit, they sought time and a half for over 40 hours work.
Christopher v. SmithKline Beecham Corp. Supreme Court held, by a five to four majority, that Christopher and Buchanan were not entitled to overtime pay under the Fair Labor Standards Act, because they were effecting sales within the Act's exception in §213(a). Alito J gave judgment, in which Roberts CJ, and Scalia J, Kennedy J, and Thomas J joined.
Christopher v. SmithKline Beecham Corp. Christopher v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 567 US _ (2012) is a US labor law case of the United States Supreme Court. It held that pharmaceutical sales representatives were not eligible for overtime pay. The court ruled in a majority opinion written by Justice Samuel Alito that sales representatives were classified as "outside salesmen" who are exempt from the Department of Labor's regulations regarding overtime pay.