Amazon/Warehouse Workers

Oh great, Thomas wrote the opinion. Glad to see he's still doing at least a little bit of work to earn that paycheck. Any conservatives that want to complain about complacency in government work should take a look at how little Justice Thomas has done in his job, particularly since 2006 when he completely stopped asking any questions during oral arguments or even paying much attention.

At any rate, this decision surprises me given how clear the case law appears to be. The practical implication creates no incentive for employers to promptly process an employee through the security checkpoint. They can tie the employee up for a potentially significant amount of time. While they write that the security screening isn't integral to the employee's work, the implication for any workers who chose to not participate would likely be termination. So not integral to their work, but integral to them keeping their job.
 
I don't see why that would require Amazon to pay, since part of the job was a security check after your shift ends.

Should they staff more to make it quicker for the workers to leave, sure but that not what the workers want, they just want extra pay.

The issue then becomes everyone wants to be at the end of the line everyday, everyone will start removing their items more slowly, who wants to be the first one out anymore, now cutting in line might actually be a bad thing.... lol

Look at public sector jobs, it seems everyone likes to stay over.
 
Somebody's going to say those temp workers should be grateful they have a job, even if at the end of every work day after walking huge distances in either extreme heat or cold, they should be treated like shifty animals looking to make a quick buck. I guess Amazon did a smart thing here, to make sure that they won't have to be blamed for the checks, and that the third party company they hired won't be as well. Passing the buck is indeed an American tradition.

The screenings were not “integral and indispensable," sounds like anything not "integral an indispensable" can be forced upon any worker without pay, even unpaid interns. I wonder how it will go against federal and state labor laws.

 
detectiveconan16 said:
Somebody's going to say those temp workers should be grateful they have a job, even if at the end of every work day after walking huge distances in either extreme heat or cold, they should be treated like shifty animals looking to make a quick buck. I guess Amazon did a smart thing here, to make sure that they won't have to be blamed for the checks, and that the third party company they hired won't be as well. Passing the buck is indeed an American tradition.

The screenings were not “integral and indispensable," sounds like anything not "integral an indispensable" can be forced upon any worker without pay, even unpaid interns. I wonder how it will go against federal and state labor laws.
Click to expand...
The interesting wrinkle is that Justice Sleepsonthejob has specifically changed the test to be applied. By making the new test a question of whether the activity is tied to the productive work of the employee is employed to perform, in theory workers might start rolling back safety related screenings as well. It's hard to say for certain.

As an aside, what I'm confused about is what Amazon's role in this was. They mention the suit is against the staffing agency by employees but then also go on to say that an Amazon spokesperson was involved. It makes me wonder if Amazon is paying their own employees for security screening time whereas the temp agency is not. Was Amazon even a named party in this?
 
What I don't get is that the decision was unanimous. Every single individual on the court said "No." - and that's crazy to me.
 
RedvsBlue said:
Oh great, Thomas wrote the opinion. Glad to see he's still doing at least a little bit of work to earn that paycheck. Any conservatives that want to complain about complacency in government work should take a look at how little Justice Thomas has done in his job, particularly since 2006 when he completely stopped asking any questions during oral arguments or even paying much attention.
Click to expand...
"I had grown up speaking a kind of dialect," Thomas, who was born in Pin Point, Ga., and raised by his grandparents in nearby Savannah, told a group of students in 2000. Classmates "used to make fun of us. ... I just started developing the habit of listening. ... I didn't ask questions in college or law school. I could learn better just listening."

More recently, Thomas said he thought lawyers should be able to do more of the talking during the hour-long sessions, to better explain their legal positions.

"I think there are far too many questions," he said in a 2009 interview with C-SPAN. "Some members of the court like that interaction. ... I prefer to listen and think it through more quietly."

Referring implicitly to how active his eight colleagues are in their questioning, Thomas said, "I think you should allow people to complete their answers and their thought and to continue their conversation. I find that coherence that you get from a conversation far more helpful than the rapid-fire questions. I don't see how you can learn a whole lot when there are 50 questions in an hour."
Click to expand...
Seems like quite a few posters can learn something from this.

I personally think that they should be paid for it. Amazon from the looks of it also does not pay its employees to go through the screening:

The ruling is likely to benefit other companies facing similar lawsuits including Amazon, CVS Health Corp and Apple Inc, according to Integrity's lawyers.
Click to expand...
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/12/09/us-usa-court-workers-idUSKBN0JN1P820141209

 
Here's the thing...salaried employees get slapped with the "it's part of the job" bullshit all the time. Meetings, extra paperwork, employer events, etc. push the work week well beyond 40 hours, and these are things that are basically never compensated for. Obviously, low-wage workers have it worse (hardest jobs often pay the least)...but ultimately, the job is either worth it or it's not.

Granted, this is a temp agency situation, but stores like Amazon and Wal-Mart do need to be mindful of nickel and diming their employees though. It's going to take them down a path of worse job performance, which leads to worse customer satisfaction, which leads to reduced profits. Amazon was without peer for a long time. But whether it's because of finally being forced to charge sales tax or just other retailers catching up, I've been saying they've been slipping for a while now.

It's crazy that these companies can't see that being all miserly and pinching pennies is just going to cause the exact thing they're trying to avoid.

 
Slippery slope "integral an indispensable",   employees can also argue that travel is part of that and they should be compensated for such as well.

What about pizza delivery people, should company pay for their car insurance and payments as well since a car is "integral an indispensable" for their job instead of working on tips

The case was so merit-less that it had to be voted down, they would of gotten a better outcome if they were subjected to the security check upon coming IN to work and not being paid for the wait.

Still you should be MORE CONCERN about THIS:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/10/us/supreme-court-sotomayor-rejects-jurors-testimony-on-deliberations.html?_r=0

 
irideabike said:
Seems like quite a few posters can learn something from this.

I personally think that they should be paid for it. Amazon from the looks of it also does not pay its employees to go through the screening:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/12/09/us-usa-court-workers-idUSKBN0JN1P820141209
Click to expand...
Which would be fine, but his "listening more" amounts to having only spoken once in the last 8 years during oral arguments (and that was to chime in on a joke that was being told). He is also consistently cited as not even paying attention, leaning back in his chair staring at the ceiling.
 
Finger_Shocker said:
Slippery slope "integral an indispensable", employees can also argue that travel is part of that and they should be compensated for such as well.

What about pizza delivery people, should company pay for their car insurance and payments as well since a car is "integral an indispensable" for their job instead of working on tips

The case was so merit-less that it had to be voted down, they would of gotten a better outcome if they were subjected to the security check upon coming IN to work and not being paid for the wait.

Still you should be MORE CONCERN about THIS:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/10/us/supreme-court-sotomayor-rejects-jurors-testimony-on-deliberations.html?_r=0
Click to expand...
Usually I disagree with you, but on the topic at hand, I agree.

On the other article, that is some scary shit. Thanks for posting that link, I have not seen or heard about that from anywhere.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top