LAST month, we discussed how unpaid wages were sought in a class action lawsuit filed against Dole Food Company by employees who claimed they were not paid for the time they spent putting on mandatory protective and sanitary clothing.
Other companies had similar practices where off-the-clock work was not paid. Best Buy, for instance, required its employees to wait, after having clocked out, for security inspections. The employees spent several minutes of unpaid time waiting for the supervisor to check their bags before they could leave. Now comes a case against another employer whose employees spent several minutes at security inspections after they have clocked out for work.
Jesse Busk and Laurie Castro are former employees of Integrity Staffing Solutions, Inc., a company which provides warehouse space and staffing to clients such Amazon.com. They sued their employer in a class action lawsuit, alleging that Integrity required them and other fellow employees to pass through security screenings at the end of their shifts. However, the time they spent undergoing this inspection was not paid. Employees waited up to 25 minutes to be searched, regularly having to remove wallets, belts, and going through metal detectors.
In the retail industry where workers handle merchandise, company concerns regarding theft of merchandise is paramount. Thus, employers set up elaborate and detailed security measures to minimize these types of losses. However, while security checks prevent company losses, the procedure may result in wage losses to employees.
Under California law, employees should be paid for all hours worked. “Hours worked” is that time during which an employee is subject to the control of an employer. Hence, employees should be paid when required to do the following:
-preliminary work before they actually start their workday and perform their main job, or
– postliminary work which are tasks performed after their main job is completed, (such as cleaning or maintaining tools or equipment, removing protective gear, sanitizing or disinfecting, or security inspections after the end of their shift)
For preliminary and postliminary work to be compensable, these activities have to be done for the employer’s benefit. Also, these tasks have to be an integral and indispensable part of the employee’s principal business, or they are required by law or the company rules to be performed.
Busk and Castro claimed that the security screenings required by their employer were intended to prevent employee theft. Thus, the security checks benefit the employer and is an integral and indispensable part of the employer’s business. The employees argue that the time they spent undergoing such checks should, therefore, be paid as work hours. The case is currently pending.
Twenty-five minutes spent going through security checks at work may not sound like a lot. However, if it occurs regularly over several years, the additional wages owed to the employee may be significant. Moreover, if it happens to several employees, then the employer has saved on labor costs, by passing the costs to its workers. In effect, the employees suffer loss of wages in the employer’s efforts to prevent loss of its merchandise. This is not only ironic, it is also illegal.
These practices violate the rights of working persons. They can be stopped through civil lawsuits consisting of individual and class actions, and enforcement of labor laws under California’s Private Attorney General Act.
* * *
C. Joe Sayas, Jr., Esq. is an experienced trial attorney who has successfully obtained significant results, including several million dollar recoveries for consumers against insurance companies and big business. He is a member of the Million Dollar-Advocates Forum—a prestigious group of trial lawyers whose membership is limited to those who have demonstrated exceptional skill, experience and excellence in advocacy. He has been featured in the cover of Los Angeles Daily Journal’s Verdicts and Settlements for his professional accomplishments and recipient of numerous awards from community and media organizations. His litigation practice concentrates in the following areas: serious personal injuries, wrongful death, insurance claims, unfair business practices, wage and hour (overtime) litigation. You can visit his website at www.joesayas law.com or contact his office by telephone at (818) 291-0088.
