To qualify for exemption the employee must be one of those who
``were employed in the growing and harvesting of such tobacco'' (H.
Rept. No. 75, 87th Cong., First Sess., p. 29) and one whose processing
work could be viewed as a ``continuation of the agricultural process,
occurring in the vicinity where the tobacco was grown.'' (Ibid. p. 26.)
This appears to require that such employment be in connection with the
crop of shade-grown tobacco which is being processed; it appears to
preclude an employee who has had no such employment in the current crop
season from qualifying for this exemption even if in some past season he
was employed in growing and harvesting such tobacco. Bona fide
employment in growing and harvesting shade-grown tobacco would also
appear to be necessary. An attempt to qualify an employee for the
processing exemption by sending him to the fields for growing or
harvesting work for a few hours or days would not establish the bona
fide employment in growing and harvesting contemplated by the Act. It
would not seem sufficient that an employee has been engaged in growing
or harvesting operations only occasionally or casually or incidentally
for a small fraction of his work time. (See Walling v. Haden, 153 F. 2d
196.) Employment for a significant period in the current crop season or
on some regular recurring basis during this season would appear to be
necessary before an agricultural employee could reasonably be described
as one ``employed in the growing and harvesting of shade-grown
tobacco.'' The determination in a doubtful case will, therefore, require
a careful examination and consideration of the particular facts.
