Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Retail Employees File Class Action Lawsuit Over 'Bag Check' Lost Wages
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
I agree. And the whole "just don't bring a bag" thing can get into other legal areas of gender inequality and women's needs to have purses for personal items that men don't have to worry about monthly...
Seriously? When did an online rumors site become real journalism? Even the biggest and best news reporting agencies aren't practicing "real journalism" anymore. It's all B/S to get bigger ratings or to promote a biased agenda. Welcome to the world we live in.
A. So if you're coming to MacRumors for "real journalism," you might want to rethink your browse list.
B. It doesn't appear improper to me to disclose a potential conflict of interest when reporting a story. Disclosure is sufficient to notify the reader of potential biases and make their own informed judgment of whether the story is tilted because of the author's affiliations. That's standard in heavy-hitting journalism as well. Your own biases about lawyers appear to cloud your ability to digest the story on any finer basis than "lawyers bad! hate story!" But... at least you disclosed your bias
Apple pays retail wages on par with Target and other stores (still higher than Wal-Mart, but only by a dollar or two). For the average Apple Store worker, it's not a livable wage by any real stretch, so I don't see that as "a good job". Furthermore, because we're a developed country (as in, NOT CHINA), we have this strange, alien notion of treating workers like people, instead of numbers (or at least, that's what fair labor laws attempt to impart).
Apple is making billions off the labor of its workforce, the majority of which is paid as little as they can get away with for said work, regardless of the cost of living where their job is located. So long as Apple Execs keep pocketing millions in bonuses and paying out ridiculous dividends to investors, I don't see why employees shouldn't be paid the extra $2 per 15 minutes they're owed for a bag search.
I don't think being paid for their time is "cashing in". Just because a business is profitable doesn't give it carte blanche authority to ignore the law or its employees. Furthermore, as evidenced by similar programs in other sectors (like Stop & Frisk programs in the civil protection sector, or even bag check programs at other store chains), this doesn't actually help to stop or curb theft. If you really want to curb theft, you should keep your workers happy so they don't feel the need to steal, and a livable wage (or even being paid for hours kept in the store, including bag checks) goes a really long way to ensuring that, as does a corporate attitude that discourages taking from other people (like managers claiming the work of their subordinates, for instance). If you treat everyone as equals, and pay them appropriately, then stigma doesn't really have a chance to grow within the organisation.
Last edited:
They wouldn't be doing these checks if they had to pay for the time it takes. Then they'd balance the cost of shrinkage with the cost of paying employees to prevent shrinkage. That seems an appropriate problem for an employer to balance, not to foist the cost on the employees.
Well I can't disagree with much of your post but did you know that Apple gives a lot of perks to their employees? Now, this is not an excuse but employees get free iPod Shuffles, their iPhone plan bill is $25/mo unlimited everything along with several other perks. I know this first hand, my cousin works for the corporate office. The labor board won't take this into account because you're right, bag checks should be on company time (and unfortunately Apple isn't the only company that does this) but the company doesn't have to offer these perks either and employees can certainly pay full price for their cell phone bill which will easily cost more than the wages they are trying to sue for.
I'm only saying all of this because you stated, "I hope Apple loses". It's not like they dog their employees and don't give them perks to make them happy employees. Companies are not required to give perks.
That being said, yes the employees that are affected should take it up with the labor board and the suit is valid but I'm not here hoping with my fingers cross that Apple loses. Sounds a bit vindictive on your part. I just hope the employees get what they worked for.
Employee handbooks still have to comply with the law. They can write what they want there, but they still have to pay their employees for the time they work.
I am going to point out that you are taking about corporate office. Not the retail line which at the end of the day is retail.
To me this is precedences. I want apple to get rack over the coals on this one to set a strong precedences. Companies abuse their hourly employees way to much as it is in retail. Bag check is just yet another one. Apple needs to pay up and end the bag check practice on employees own time.
When I worked at Apple, it would be another manager, or the next level associate below them. I've done it a few times.
I worked there for 13 months. That's $2.875 per check, usually 2 per day, roughly 5 days a week ($28.75) for 13 months $373.75. So do we get taxed fed/state from that time of employment or now? Because my tax bracket went up at least 1-2 levels.
Companies are considered persons. Apple is legally obligated to follow the laws of the land. How about companies taking some "personal responsibility" for following labor laws...?
Maybe they don't have cars? After all, they're making a low hourly wage. Maybe they took the bus and brought their lunch in a backpack?
How about this: how about companies follow the rules? How about not making excuses for them when they contravene labor laws?
5-15 minutes is a complete joke. I was an apple sales person and then manager and it took all of 15 seconds. There is always a manager on the floor who is not usually interacting with customers (usually they are managing employees, checking shelf stocks, etc.) so you might wait 30 seconds at the most.
Useless law suit, not based in reality. Plus, it is their choice to bring in personal items so it will get tossed.
Useless law suit, not based in reality. Plus, it is their choice to bring in personal items so it will get tossed.
Leave Your Stuff at Home
When I worked in retail in the 1990s, we were subjected to the same rules. Every retailer I've ever known does this, it is only news because it is Apple.
When people then complained about the mandatory "pat-downs", the response was simple, "leave your stuff at home". As far as going on break, do you really need to take EVERYTHING with you? Put your stuff in a locker (almost every retail employer has them).
This is common practice, and I am sure it will be thrown out of court. There is simply decades of this occurring and it would send ripples through the loss prevention community if it were not permitted.
When I worked in retail in the 1990s, we were subjected to the same rules. Every retailer I've ever known does this, it is only news because it is Apple.
When people then complained about the mandatory "pat-downs", the response was simple, "leave your stuff at home". As far as going on break, do you really need to take EVERYTHING with you? Put your stuff in a locker (almost every retail employer has them).
This is common practice, and I am sure it will be thrown out of court. There is simply decades of this occurring and it would send ripples through the loss prevention community if it were not permitted.
Disclaimer: Not a lawyer. But I am a business professor. This is not a cut an dried case by any means.
First, why was this policy put in place? Likely there was significant "shrinkage" in their inventories. Research shows that more loss comes from employees than customers. So, the policy likely came about because of the behavior of employees.
Second, no one is required to bring bags into work. If you bring a bag in knowing the policy, you have consented to being searched and have volunteered your time. If you don't want to be inconvenienced, lock your bag in the trunk.
Third, Apple was not making employees work during this time. The laws in this area are to prevent employers from getting employees to work without paying them. The only benefit that Apple got was to not have their products stolen.
I would wonder, were there 15 minutes during the day where these employees were not directly adding value to Apple? Do they want to give back money for the times when they were just standing around?
I very much believe that employees should have their rights protected, but I also believe that companies have the right to protect themselves from abusive employees. Since there was a clear remedy for this that would be easily implemented by an employee, I would have to side with Apple on this one.
First, why was this policy put in place? Likely there was significant "shrinkage" in their inventories. Research shows that more loss comes from employees than customers. So, the policy likely came about because of the behavior of employees.
Second, no one is required to bring bags into work. If you bring a bag in knowing the policy, you have consented to being searched and have volunteered your time. If you don't want to be inconvenienced, lock your bag in the trunk.
Third, Apple was not making employees work during this time. The laws in this area are to prevent employers from getting employees to work without paying them. The only benefit that Apple got was to not have their products stolen.
I would wonder, were there 15 minutes during the day where these employees were not directly adding value to Apple? Do they want to give back money for the times when they were just standing around?
I very much believe that employees should have their rights protected, but I also believe that companies have the right to protect themselves from abusive employees. Since there was a clear remedy for this that would be easily implemented by an employee, I would have to side with Apple on this one.
Well this is a great question. Almost every job I've had that question has come up, managers have been known to steal because they can.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
I can't believe we've made it to page 4 without the 2 most typical comments when anything comes out against Apple:
But I guess neither work well in this particular incarnation.
Die, Apple employees, Die!
-and-
Apple should just buy Apple.
-and-
Apple should just buy Apple.
But I guess neither work well in this particular incarnation.
So, every Apple employee will be paid out an extra $15 for their unpaid hour per every 5 years of employment. Oh, alright.
Could end up being a lot more than that especially if that extra time would take someone into overtime. This happened where my wife used to work and the employees ended up getting a nice check after it was over
I guess for a lot of people on these boards, as long as they get their iToys then who cares about the working conditions. Thankfully most of us are not like that and can sympathize.
- Status