In Packard Motor Car Co. v. NLRB, 330 U.S. 485, 490 (1947), the Court considered the phrase "in the interest of an employer" contained in the definition of "employer" in the original 1935 National Labor Relations Act. The Court stated that "every employee, from the very fact of employment in the master's business, is required to act in his interest." 330 U.S., at 488. The Court rejected the argument of the dissenters who, like the Board in this case, advanced the proposition that the phrase covered only "those who acted for management . . . in formulating and executing its labor policies." Id., at 496 (Douglas, J., dissenting); cf. Reply Brief for Petitioner 4 (filed July 23, 1993) (nurses are supervisors when, "in addition to performing their professional duties and responsibilities, they also possess the authority to affect the job status or pay of employees working under them"). Consistent with the ordinary meaning of the phrase, the Court in Packard Motor determined that acts within the scope of employment or on the authorized business of the employer are "in the interest of the employer." 330 U.S., at 488-489.