General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWTF!!!! Supreme Court rules no worker pay for security screening
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday handed a victory to employers over worker compensation, ruling that companies do not have to pay employees for the time they spend undergoing security checks at the end of their shifts in a case involving an Amazon.com Inc warehousing contractor.
On a 9-0 vote, the court decided that employees of Integrity Staffing Solutions facilities in Nevada, where merchandise is processed and shipped, cannot claim compensation for the time they spend going through security screening - up to half an hour a day - aimed at protecting against theft.
Justice Clarence Thomas wrote on behalf of the court in the important employment law case that the screening process is not a "principal activity" of the workers' jobs under a law called the Fair Labor Standards Act and therefore is not subject to compensation.
For workers to be paid, the activity in question must be an intrinsic element of the job and one with which the employee cannot dispense if he is to perform his principal activities, Thomas wrote.
http://news.yahoo.com/supreme-court-rules-no-worker-pay-security-screening-151514222--finance.html
9-0 FFS!!!
Initech
(100,063 posts)PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014961126
With also mention of the law and 1951 labor department ruling that led to the 9-0 decision.
House of Roberts
(5,168 posts)How can an employee 'dispense' with a security screening, if the job requires it? By not working?
How did the court end up 9-0, with inverse logic like this?
etherealtruth
(22,165 posts)I am disgusted ... but, not even remotely surprised
AZ Progressive
(3,411 posts)Workers are thus seen as no more than wage slaves.
etherealtruth
(22,165 posts)PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)monmouth4
(9,694 posts). This alone is a shock to me...
warrant46
(2,205 posts)After the South was forced to dispense with their quaint customs of Shackles and Chains.
former9thward
(31,981 posts)submitted a brief to the court asking for this decision.
http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/publications/supreme_court_preview/BriefsV4/13-433_pet_amcu_usa.authcheckdam.pdf
TheKentuckian
(25,023 posts)Thanks!
Posteritatis
(18,807 posts)HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)99Forever
(14,524 posts)... or is going to do one damn to help the working class in this nation, perhaps now the message is clear.
Pitchfork and guillotine time folks.
Sherman A1
(38,958 posts)👎
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)VERSION of the law, to wit:
NO, standing isn't part of the actual job, but IT ISN'T THE WORKERS WHO DECIDED TO STAND IN THESE LINES. AMAZON MAKES THEM.
Yet the SCOTUS decided AGAINST THE WORKERS INSTEAD OF THE EMPLOYER WHO MAKES THE EMPLOYEES DO SOMETHING "NOT INTRINSIC" TO THE JOB!!