The case of Walling, Wage and Hour Administrator v. General Industries Co., 1946 revolved around the issue of whether or not certain employees were engaged in commerce as defined by the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The FLSA was enacted to regulate minimum wage, maximum working hours, and child labor on a federal level. In this case, General Industries Co., an Ohio corporation that manufactured products for interstate commerce but did not directly engage in it themselves argued that their employees should be exempt from these regulations. However, the Supreme Court ruled against them stating that even though they may not directly participate in interstate commerce; their production activities are closely related and essential to such commerce thus making them subject to FLSA's provisions. This decision expanded the scope of who is considered involved in "commerce" under federal law.

In the dissenting opinion for Walling v. General Industries Co., Justice Frankfurter argued that the majority's interpretation of "workweek" under the Fair Labor Standards Act was too narrow and failed to consider its broader implications. He contended that a workweek should not be strictly defined as a fixed seven-day period, but rather it should encompass any regularly recurring period of 168 hours (seven consecutive 24-hour periods). This would allow employers more flexibility in scheduling their employees' working hours without violating wage and hour laws. Furthermore, he disagreed with the majority's view that time spent on-call or waiting by employees is non-compensable unless they are engaged in actual labor during such periods. Instead, he believed this time constitutes an integral part of their job duties and thus should be considered compensable work time under federal law.