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.