Apple to Face Class Action Lawsuit Over Off-the-Clock Employee Bag Checking

[iJandro]

Seriously 10-15 minutes? wow...I used to work at an apple store and it only took 10-15 seconds...either way, it still didn't stop certain employees from stealing iphone 3Gs back in the day XD.

 

[steve62388]

You need to understand something. Having a job is a PRIVILEGE, not a right. An employer is PAYING money to someone to work for them in that employer's domain.

Hardly. It's a basic human right to be given the opportunity to survive with dignity, and in today's world that means money.

Companies don't hire you out of the goodness of their hearts, they hire you to make them money. On some occasions that crosses the line into exploitation.

 

[ptb42]

Apple isn't the only company that requires bag checks as employees are leaving. It's pretty common at US defense contractors -- for both incoming and outgoing.

Does anyone work for such a company? When I've worked for one as a client, I was a contractor and on salary. I got paid the same. And any significant time I spent waiting was included in my billable hours for the day.

 

[ptb42]

In the UK as a citizens if stopped for a bag search by security its legal to refuse and point out only a police officer has the right to demand a search. So you ask for the police to be called. Seeing as the apple employees are clocked out they are no longer employees, they are citizens. So ask for a police officer. This will force apple to do the searches when you are clocked in as employees.

I can't speak for UK law, but in the US there is a major flaw in your argument:

The employee will have notice that they are required to submit to a bag search before exiting the store. It's a condition of employment.

If after receiving notice, they refuse a search -- the store can terminate the employee, immediately. It will be "with cause", so they wouldn't be eligible for unemployment, and are unlikely to get a good reference for another job.

You can make the case that it should be done while they are still "on the clock", but that's a separate issue. And as others have pointed out, the US Supreme Court has already ruled unanimously on this issue.

 

[Zxxv]

I can't speak for UK law, but in the US there is a major flaw in your argument:

The employee will have notice that they are required to submit to a bag search before exiting the store. It's a condition of employment.

If after receiving notice, they refuse a search -- the store can terminate the employee, immediately. It will be "with cause", so they wouldn't be eligible for unemployment, and are unlikely to get a good reference for another job.

You can make the case that it should be done while they are still "on the clock", but that's a separate issue. And as others have pointed out, the US Supreme Court has already ruled unanimously on this issue.

They can't sack everyone. Stand together or fall alone.

 

[C DM]

I can't speak for UK law, but in the US there is a major flaw in your argument:

The employee will have notice that they are required to submit to a bag search before exiting the store. It's a condition of employment.

If after receiving notice, they refuse a search -- the store can terminate the employee, immediately. It will be "with cause", so they wouldn't be eligible for unemployment, and are unlikely to get a good reference for another job.

You can make the case that it should be done while they are still "on the clock", but that's a separate issue. And as others have pointed out, the US Supreme Court has already ruled unanimously on this issue.

Keep in mind the differences between federal and state laws.

 

[gnasher729]

In labor laws there is a 7 minute rule, which allows companies to round down hours worked, depending on how they pay their employees.
I can't imagine a bag check taking 15 minutes. That's some bag.

It's not the bag check taking the time. It is having to wait 15 minutes for a manager to turn up to do a ten second bag check. This should really be easy: If an employee can do whatever they like (like leaving the store without a bag check) then they shouldn't get paid. If an employee must do as told by his employer (like waiting for a manager to turn up for a bag check) they should be paid.

 

[MH01]

I didn't think the public had access to the 'staff only' areas such as store rooms, nor did the public handle stock, faulty/replacement hardware etc etc etc, so as you have corrected me on this, lets search the customers also as it's only fair.

Ever been in a retail store? There is stuff the public can steal!

 

[ladycsr]

Frys and some other companies (i think best buy) search their customers on the way out. I don't think their is much of a case here.
Apple should maybe do the searches in the back instead of in the front for all to see.

 

[ladycsr]

If what you say is true and it truly takes seconds, your statement is correct. If it takes 15 minutes plus on a daily basis, then your statement is false. I agree with you and everyone else about Apple's right to check bags, but not paying a non-salary employee for time worked is illegal.

The "demeaning" aspect is also legitimate... apple (and other employers) should do these searches in the back.
How will the CEOs feel if they get searched on the way out in front of everyone to see?

 

[elmalvado]

I worked there, they did this on the regular. That is everyday, 7 days a week to every single employee walking out of that store including those leaving for lunch and other breaks as long as they were carrying a bag. That is A LOT of time when the aggregate is added up. If companies don't want their employees to steal from them, they know what to do. Pay them a better wage.

$12/hr would be my best guess at the average Apple Store employee rate. Which does not add up to much these days. Try living on that wage and try buying some Apple gear of your own. It's not really possible, unless you live on the cheap for several months. Try doing that these days.

Working for Apple does have it's benefits, but for a company making billions upon billions upon billions upon billions of USD...they could easily eat the shrink caused by employee theft, or just pay that back to the people that don't steal. In a company with cameras everywhere in there stores a bag check makes 0 sense, makes employees feel like wage slaves, and helps to further the divide between management and "the help."

 

[burgundyyears]

If companies don't want their employees to steal from them, they know what to do. Pay them a better wage.

I sure hope Wall Street firm employees use that excuse too.

 

[Allagion]

Frys and some other companies (i think best buy) search their customers on the way out. I don't think their is much of a case here.
Apple should maybe do the searches in the back instead of in the front for all to see.

You made an illogical comparison between very different issues. I used to work for Best Buy and worked loss prevention when they were short staffed. Best Buy and Fry's check receipts for accuracy to ensure everything was scanned (over scanning was a lesser concern). Also to mark receipts to prevent fraud. That is a brief contact regarding items that are generally in plain view. The Apple employees are saying they had to wait 5-10+ minutes just to get the bag check before leaving the store. Best Buy and Fry's don't make customers wait that long before letting them leave.

 

[Glideslope]

But that's not the issue here. If you have to pass through a security station to clock in, that's generally ok if federal law applies. If you can clock out inside the secured area and walk through the detectors, that's ok if federal law applies. But under California Labor Code §11040(2)(k) "[h]ours worked" means the time during which an employee is subject to the control of an employer. So for Apple to say "Stay here longer than obligated for us to search you or you're fired" is arguably "subject to the control of an employer."

I see your point. Thankfully, I'm not in California.

 

[res.ipsa]

Yes. Anyone who brings in a "bag," be it a backpack, purse, or something else has it checked before leaving. In every retail setting I know of, it is a manager, supervisor, or some other leadership position. The plaintiffs are saying they had to wait after their shift ended for the right person to come and check their bags. That could have taken 5, 10, 15, 20 minutes (or longer) before they were allowed to leave, without pay.

Amazing! It's been a LONG time since I had a retail job and I've NEVER heard of such a thing! Just curious... do you recall if this policy was stated in your employment agreement?

 

[res.ipsa]

It's simple if you don't understand the applicable law. California Labor Code §11040(2)(k) "[h]ours worked" means the time during which an employee is subject to the control of an employer. Now, to say the contractual relation ends when you clock out is a ludicrous statement. You can still have outstanding promises you must keep, even when not working, as a condition of employment. Even if it did end, these employees should be paid because they can clock out, but still be subject to the employer's control. Here, the plaintiffs are saying they had to wait in the store, off the clock, for a manager to actually begin the bag check. Saying "You can't leave until I say so" is exercising control, meaning they must pay the employee under California law.

Theoretically speaking, given the same facts, since Apple didn't pay these employees could the company have opened themselves to a sort of intentional tort for detaining them without privilege? How does consent work in power relationships?

 

[shpankey]

In no way shape or form would this deter theft. Once the practice is known, thief's will simply alter their methodology.

 

[C DM]

In no way shape or form would this deter theft. Once the practice is known, thief's will simply alter their methodology.

It can deter simple theft, which is still something as there are some who would potentially go for theft of opportunity when it's simple, but might not be willing to put anything more into it. Of course if someone is truly committed to being a thief they'll look for all kinds of ways to do it, but that doesn't mean that some simple barriers shouldn't be placed simply because of that (otherwise with an approach like that we wouldn't even have locks on doors since someone determined would find ways to get around them anyway, right?).

 

[malexandria]

When I was in college, I worked at a record store and they used to do it all the time. I didn't find it "demeaning," I had a little more self worth. I just thought it was stupid - why hire someone you don't trust? This is a sign of the spoiled entitlement generation. People actually think they should be compensated for something as stupid as this when it barely takes 5 freaking minutes (if that!).

 

[C DM]

When I was in college, I worked at a record store and they used to do it all the time. I didn't find it "demeaning," I had a little more self worth. I just thought it was stupid - why hire someone you don't trust? This is a sign of the spoiled entitlement generation. People actually think they should be compensated for something as stupid as this when it barely takes 5 freaking minutes (if that!).

Unless it regularly takes 15 or so minutes when you are all done and basically at the door to leave and have to stand there and wait for someone to free up and allow you to actually leave (even though you already finished your work and need to be on your way, but have to just stand and wait).

 

[HenryDJP]

Hardly. It's a basic human right to be given the opportunity to survive with dignity, and in today's world that means money.

Companies don't hire you out of the goodness of their hearts, they hire you to make them money. On some occasions that crosses the line into exploitation.

Oh it's HARDLY a privilege to have a job? Ah okay. What unicorn dream are you living in?

 

[jigzaw]

I don't understand the need to perform these checks after the employee clocks out. Apple has created the most amazing technology and the old "well the timepunch clock is in the other room and the employee has to leave this way" excuse is asinine. The Apple Store certainly knows when I walk in and walk out because they're tied right into my iPhone. It would be so simple to clock employees in and out when they set foot in and out of the store. Problem solved.

The idea that any employer can basically hold an employee hostage for more than a couple minutes without pay regularly day after day should so obviously be illegal that I can't even fathom those who would argue otherwise. Imagine that once you clock out for lunch, you have exactly 30 minutes to clock back in and yet 10 of those minutes are spent finding a manager to check your bag for you because the company thinks you might be a criminal. But god forbid you walk in one minute late from lunch and you're scolded like a child.

To reverse what one poster posted earlier, it is a PRIVILEGE for a company to have employees and operate in the richest country in the world to sell their wares. The least they can do is obey our laws and treat those employees with respect and not try to squeeze extra unpaid time out of them.

 

[steve62388]

Oh it's HARDLY a privilege to have a job? Ah okay. What unicorn dream are you living in?

You said, 'Having a job is a PRIVILEGE, not a right. An employer is PAYING money to someone to work for them in that employer's domain'. Like employees should wake up every morning and pray to their employer for deigning to give them the super privileged right to work for them. Your employer doesn't give two hoots about you or your welfare except if it benefits them in greater productivity or brings them negative publicity. If it was more economical to replace you with a robot they wouldn't think twice, and in every workplace around the world where this is possible it has already been done. You're only useful to your employer if you're making them money.

There are a few exceptions to this rule like the John Lewis Partnership in the UK or Hubbard Cereals in NZ. These are extremely rare though. Curiously both these examples have a grounding in their founders being religious, but I prefer not to comment further on that. It's not something I'm into but maybe that's what it takes for someone to run a socially responsible business?

If you want to talk about rights then it's every person's right to live with dignity, and in the circles everybody here moves in that means money. Money to afford shelter and food at a bare minimum. It's everybody's right for their government to create an environment where they can get a job to earn that money if they're capable, not a privilege.

Therefore your statement, 'Having a job is a PRIVILEGE, not a right', is false.

 

[HenryDJP]

You said, 'Having a job is a PRIVILEGE, not a right. An employer is PAYING money to someone to work for them in that employer's domain'. Like employees should wake up every morning and pray to their employer for deigning to give them the super privileged right to work for them. Your employer doesn't give two hoots about you or your welfare except if it benefits them in greater productivity or brings them negative publicity. If it was more economical to replace you with a robot they wouldn't think twice, and in every workplace around the world where this is possible it has already been done. You're only useful to your employer if you're making them money.

There are a few exceptions to this rule like the John Lewis Partnership in the UK or Hubbard Cereals in NZ. These are extremely rare though. Curiously both these examples have a grounding in their founders being religious, but I prefer not to comment further on that. It's not something I'm into but maybe that's what it takes for someone to run a socially responsible business?

If you want to talk about rights then it's every person's right to live with dignity, and in the circles everybody here moves in that means money. Money to afford shelter and food at a bare minimum. It's everybody's right for their government to create an environment where they can get a job to earn that money if they're capable, not a privilege.

Therefore your statement, 'Having a job is a PRIVILEGE, not a right', is false.

I think you're just purposely ignoring my point. It IS a privilege to HAVE a job. As you said earlier; "Your employer doesn't give two hoots about you or your welfare except if it benefits them in greater productivity or brings them negative publicity."

And that was exactly my point. An employer can hire anyone they please that qualifies for the job and if they don't like you for any reason they can fire you and replace you. It's not your right to keep that job after they hire you. It's always a privilege to work under someone else's roof who is paying you.

Just as one doesn't have a right to drive a car, it's a privilege.

If you feel indifferent then you're falling under the title of "Entitlement", which is what is sadly wrong with this new generation of people.

 

[HenryDJP]

I don't understand the need to perform these checks after the employee clocks out. Apple has created the most amazing technology and the old "well the timepunch clock is in the other room and the employee has to leave this way" excuse is asinine. The Apple Store certainly knows when I walk in and walk out because they're tied right into my iPhone. It would be so simple to clock employees in and out when they set foot in and out of the store. Problem solved.

The idea that any employer can basically hold an employee hostage for more than a couple minutes without pay regularly day after day should so obviously be illegal that I can't even fathom those who would argue otherwise. Imagine that once you clock out for lunch, you have exactly 30 minutes to clock back in and yet 10 of those minutes are spent finding a manager to check your bag for you because the company thinks you might be a criminal. But god forbid you walk in one minute late from lunch and you're scolded like a child.

Oh Lordy. It's seems pretty obvious you've never worked in retail you're entire life. Please don't deny it. I have for many years and each company I worked for did the same thing as Apple. While Apple and these other companies should improve their strategies in regards to employees checking out and baggage check, you should find your way into the world of reality.