Lawsuit by Apple Retail Employees Over Off-the-Clock Bag Searches Dismissed

[C DM]

§ 785.24 Principles noted in Portal-to-Portal Bulletin.

If the employees belongings are not required for their “principal activities" and activities involving them are not ncluded as an integral part of a principal activity are those closely related activities which are indispensable to its performance, then the employer doesn't have to cover the time.

Activities such as checking in and out and waiting in line to do so are not regarded as integral parts of the principal activity or activities.

The issue is if those activities take an unreasonable amount of time.

 

[Glideslope]

Good. Correct Decision.

 

[apolloa]

No. I'm comparing the fact that you can get around the bag check simply by not bringing one. If safety was my concern, I wouldn't fly to Florida or go to the park. Weapons and bombs can be brought in by other means.

So your saying Disney parks check your bags to see if you've stolen something?

 

[pdqgp]

The issue is if those activities take an unreasonable amount of time.

The resulting time it takes could be zero if the employee opted to choose to simply not bring a bag in with them. Doing otherwise subjects them to what you're seeing today.

It's no different than employees that have to go through security screenings at employers all over the US before entering their place of employment and actually clocking in. The time it takes to park and get screened is often on their own time.

 

[Glideslope]

The issue is if those activities take an unreasonable amount of time.

Thank you. So simple, yet so invisible on MR.

 

[Max(IT)]

Hard for me to imagine to work at a place where the employer sifts through my bag and examines my phone during the lunchbreak. That must be an atmosphere there.

Where I'm working security measures are much more tighter than in any Apple Store, mate .... And I mean MUCH MORE ....

 

[C DM]

The resulting time it takes could be zero if the employee opted to choose to simply not bring a bag in with them. Doing otherwise subjects them to what you're seeing today.

It's no different than employees that have to go through security screenings at employers all over the US before entering their place of employment and actually clocking in. The time it takes to park and get screened is often on their own time.

It doesn't matter if it wouldn't be needed if no bags are brought, what matters if bags are allowed then their search should be within a reasonable amount of time.

Thank you. So simple, yet so invisible on MR.

Too much of all kinds of other "stuff" get unnecessarily brought into all of this with discussions going into all kinds of tangential directions.

 

[pdqgp]

The issue is if those activities take an unreasonable amount of time.

Activities such as checking in and out and waiting in line to do so are not regarded as integral parts of the principal activity or activities thus the time it takes due to the employee choosing to bring a bag in are on them. If it's a great concern and there's a consensus among employees, then:

(d) Section 3(o). Section 3(o) under § 785.49 Applicable provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act explains that those details are to be defined in terms of or by custom or practice under a bona fide collective-bargaining agreement applicable to the particular employees.

 

[Swampthing]

You didn't need to reply, but you did anyway.

Hey, I don't need to eat lunch at work. I don't need breaks. I don't need to have a safe work environment. I don't need to be paid, even. I don't need to do anything but die and pay taxes, really.

It seems to me this argument of yours and the judge's about not "needing" to bring a bag to work is just superfluous. Obviously, the employee FELT THE DAMN NEED TO BRING A BAG TO WORK FOR A FLIPPING REASON (e.g. bring lunch, whatever) and having the judge dismiss their "need" as a "you don't need to eat" kind of reply is flipping patronizing at best and being a total tool of the corporate overlords of this country at worst.

I guess you didn't realize my last two posts were sarcasm.

Obviously you are missing the point. If you NEED to bring the bag to work, then you NEED to have your bag checked at the end of the day. If you don't want to comply, don't bring the bag. Bring your lunch to work in a brown bag. Throw away the bag when done.

So many people bring personal bags to work that are so big they look like Samsonite luggage. These personal bags are filled with personal effects. They will spend paid company time on the job using these personal effects and have no problem with that at all. It's their "right" I guess. They don't compensate the company by spending extra minutes at the end of the day to make up for their time spent using personal effects for their personal enjoyment on company time, do they? Nope. (This is the part all the "I love my bag" folks completely miss...)

But they have the nerve to complain when they have to spend their own personal time at the end of the day having that bag same checked?

Entitlement at it's ultimate definition! That's something you NEED to learn.

 

[rmatthewware]

I wonder how much Apple stock is lost each month due to employee theft? I would guess it's very low. And it's because of these bag checks. Any employee knows how to adapt to their work environment. If you know you have a bag check coming, you make sure your bag is as basic as possible. You bring your lunch in a paper bag. If it needs to be kept cool, you get a basic freezer bag with only one compartment. You get a small purse with one compartment and only bring things that are absolutely necessary.

Really, these searches are good for the employee. You avoid employee theft, and if anything does go missing, the average employee can say they were checked on the way out.

 

[Popopo930]

Honestly, a ruling like this can only happen in the USA. Also bag searches on employees time is probably unique to this country. In Germany for example the unions would laugh at a company coming up with that idea. If they want to look through my stuff, they can pay for it. For me as European that's only common sense. In Europe (esp. Germany) employees are treated as valuable assets and not as replaceable worker bees.

Also, why doesn't Apple provide lockers for the bags so the workers can't bring the bag in the store ???

 

[noanker]

Sadly, this occurs in the U.S. and the workers just bend over and take it. Try doing this in France and see what happens.
I truly respect French workers, and Europeans in general, for their collective sense of solidarity.

On a more macro level, complaints like this and others can be voiced by American workers all day long, but until you stage mass walkouts and lasting strikes that hit an employer in the pocketbook, nothing will change. Workers in this country used to unite and stand up for their rights. WTF happened?

This ruling will definitely reverberate and affect future claims of this type. The ruling will be front page news in many HR centric media.

 

[pdqgp]

Also, why doesn't Apple provide lockers for the bags so the workers can't bring the bag in the store ???

it wouldn't stop the employee from bringing stolen goods from elsewhere into the store into the locker room where it could then be stashed in their bags.

I'm a doctor, have lockers for my staff and their bags and belongings are subject to search by mgt. due to this very reason. We have caught staff stealing everything from Toilet paper to needles and drugs.

I suppose the answer would be the employee could check their bags into a locker that they would then need permission to access prior to doing so. Sort of like a bag-check area. The downside would be costs associated with staffing such an area that may not be used by many.

 

[Glideslope]

Too much of all kinds of other "stuff" get unnecessarily brought into all of this with discussions going into all kinds of tangential directions.

Nice.

 

[nfortna]

Everyone at my retail job gets their bag checked whenever we have to leave. It's never been a big deal and I'd rather have a bag checked than be suspect when something goes missing while I was there.

 

[ProjectManager101]

That is like micromanaging... from the employees side.

The funny thing is that if the employees win the case, they would have received like 20 cents each, the lawyers would keep the rest. I mean... this is just business for the lawyers, they saw an opportunity there.

 

[gixxerfool]

So your saying Disney parks check your bags to see if you've stolen something?

At no point in either of my posts did I bring up why they are checking them. I only mentioned that you can in fact get around them. You keep bringing up why and ignoring that they can simply be avoided. Several here have even mentioned using clear bags to speed up the process.

 

[1498032]

Sounds like you not only haven't worked retail for the past several decades (if at all), but also didn't pay attention when the Supreme Court addressed this very issue recently as well and UNANIMOUSLY AGREED that people aren't entitled to get paid for this time.



So Apple's a bad retailer for using the same procedures in their stores that every other retailer does?



So you want the store to pay your daughter more than the others who work there because she made plans after work which have absolutely nothing to do with the store's function or her job.

Why does your kid deserve more money because she chose to bring a personal bag into a retail workplace? Is she a princess or somehow special? Should everyone else ALSO stay on the clock and be forced to hang out to accommodate your daughter's time waiting because SHE decided that she just HAD to bring in her bag to accommodate HER plans?

Or even worse, why should your daughter basically get to stop working before the others on the shift and NOT do the work the entire time she is scheduled? Why should everyone else have to work their shifts end-to-end while your kid gets to stand in a line and NOT work for the 15-20 minutes? Oh yeah. Because it's a party or something and it's just that important.

No. You can either deal with it, or get another job. Same as everyone else in that industry. You don't need to bring that purse to work. Use your pocket, and if it's too much to handle, get a different job.

This is the worst, most ignorant, childish, naive, and short-sighted post I have read in quite some time. Not everyone lives the apparently easy life that you lead.

 

[pdqgp]

That is like micromanaging... from the employees side.

The funny thing is that if the employees win the case, they would have received like 20 cents each, the lawyers would keep the rest. I mean... this is just business for the lawyers, they saw an opportunity there.

exactly. if these employees wanted to affect change, they could have simply approach it from a collective bargaining standpoint vs court. lawyers likely talked them into litigation and everyone probably thought Apple would cave or settle given their earnings.

 

[numlock]

so you're here to debate wording? stay on topic please.



who do you think is going to cover the cost of Apple's legal issues? You must be young and not work in business to understand. legal costs aren't free and they won't be incurred by companies. The costs to defend these dumb arguments in court will eventually be passed onto consumers.

i am the one that is on topic.

this is the post i quoted.

why on Apple's time, they set the rules and the employee is the one who is choosing to bring the bag knowing that it would result in a search. Employees choice to do so means doing it on their time.

Not the company's issue if their people drive or not or have a place such as a car to put their bag they knowingly will need to be searched.

obviously costs are taken into account when they decide on their prices but each trial is not going to increase the price of products. it is immaturity to think they are not charging as much as they could at this moment. most importantly it creates mentality were people should be frightened to try legal recourses and accept everything whether they are staff or consumers.

i am going to ignore that stupid and patronising remark but i have worked around and with some of the biggest companies in their field (in various sectors) as well as owning and operating the leading (in quality not size) company in its field as well.

 

[pdqgp]

obviously costs are taken into account when they decide on their prices but each trial is not going to increase the price of products. it is immaturity to think they are not charging as much as they could at this moment. most importantly it creates mentality were people should be frightened to try legal recourses and accept everything whether they are staff or consumers.

You're vary naive.

i am going to ignore that stupid and patronising remark but i have worked around and with some of the biggest companies in their field (in various sectors) as well as owning and operating the leading (in quality not size) company in its field as well.

hopefully your HR Dept. and legal counsel are more aware of labor laws than you are then.

 

[numlock]

I wonder how much Apple stock is lost each month due to employee theft? I would guess it's very low. And it's because of these bag checks. Any employee knows how to adapt to their work environment. If you know you have a bag check coming, you make sure your bag is as basic as possible. You bring your lunch in a paper bag. If it needs to be kept cool, you get a basic freezer bag with only one compartment. You get a small purse with one compartment and only bring things that are absolutely necessary.

Really, these searches are good for the employee. You avoid employee theft, and if anything does go missing, the average employee can say they were checked on the way out.

so in short you dont how much is stolen, assume its very little and then assume its because its because of the bag checks which btw could (at other companies as well) very well happen so that staff were minimally affected.

 

[apolloa]

At no point in either of my posts did I bring up why they are checking them. I only mentioned that you can in fact get around them. You keep bringing up why and ignoring that they can simply be avoided. Several here have even mentioned using clear bags to speed up the process.

Now your changing your argument, you are moving further away from the factual differences of the public having their bags checked when entering a theme park to when an Apple retail staff have their bags checked by their employers.
You made the post linking the two, I posted why it's the wrong assumption to make and the wrong analogy to use.

 

[numlock]

You're vary naive.



hopefully your HR Dept. is more aware of labor laws than you are then.

naive as in they are not currently maximising their shareholders return? is that what you are claiming?

way to stay on topic by bringing in something totally irrelevant.

and again you ignore your own post. i would too if i were you.

 

[LV426]

That's a horrible straw man arguement.

The proper way to look at it is: you can avoid being mugged by not walking down the street carrying something that a mugger wants to steal from you.

Au contraire, it is not a straw man argument at all.

In the first case, according to the judge, an Apple employee can avoid being mugged for his time if he abstains from a certain action, namely by not taking a bag to work.

I can likewise avoid a street mugging of my property by not leaving my house.

Following either route in the above examples would be an infringement of liberties.

Apple should have no expectation that an employee will be a thief. Likewise, I have no expectation that I'm going to get mugged tomorrow. Apple should be grown up about this and deal with matters of theft if and when they arise, rather than treat every employee as a potential thief.