U.S. Supreme Court rejects Amazon warehouse worker wage appeal • Hacker News Board

Re: U.S. Supreme Court rejects Amazon warehouse worker wage appeal

#31

Post by colinj2 » Mon, Oct 07, 2019, 3:37 PM UTC

tom_mellior wrote: post #23

rtkwe wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In its 2014 ruling in the case, the Supreme Court decided that under a 1947 law that amended the federal Fair Labor Standards Act, companies do not have to pay employees for the time they spend undergoing security checks. It's a supreme court decision that is allowing Amazon to do this [0]. TL;DR the decision is solely on if the "activities are an intrinsic element of the employee’s primary job duties and one that…

> hired to retrieve products from warehouse shelves, not to undergo security screenings, and the company could eliminate the screenings altogether without impairing the employees’ ability to complete their work Wow. They were hired to do work, not to be locked up for half an hour per day and treated like criminals. Moreover, it is obviously clear that Amazon could just stop locking them up for half an hour per day an…

It’s seems degrading to be subject to this but at the same time the majority of theft is from employees. I’ve hear about these type of precautions at UPS sorting centers. It’s also why cash register security cameras are pointed at the register not where a robber would be in clear view. That said I’m almost certain the UPS employees are paid while doing the screening. That’s a benefit of labor unions.

Re: U.S. Supreme Court rejects Amazon warehouse worker wage appeal

#32

Post by dwohnitmok » Mon, Oct 07, 2019, 3:38 PM UTC

rtkwe wrote: post #9

FPGAhacker wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Tangentially it seems crazy they're not required to pay for the time spent going through security. If they're paid hourly and not free to go they're still on the job. It’s an asshole move for sure. I hope they are forced to pay up, and then they will invest in streamlining the process.

> In its 2014 ruling in the case, the Supreme Court decided that under a 1947 law that amended the federal Fair Labor Standards Act, companies do not have to pay employees for the time they spend undergoing security checks. It's a supreme court decision that is allowing Amazon to do this [0]. TL;DR the decision is solely on if the "activities are an intrinsic element of the employee’s primary job duties and one that…

As usual, when involving a Supreme Court case, I'd recommend reading the case directly as they are usually eminently readable. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/13-433_5h26.pdf

It was a unanimous decision here, because the Portal-to-Portal Act (the 1947 law referenced) has pretty consistently been interpreted both by regulatory bodies and courts in the intervening 70+ years to explicitly exclude such activities from the FLSA. If you want to change this, you definitely need to go to Congress with this.

Re: U.S. Supreme Court rejects Amazon warehouse worker wage appeal

#33

Post by gerbilly » Mon, Oct 07, 2019, 3:40 PM UTC

dev_dull wrote: post #16

DangitBobby wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then the products should cost more or get here in 3 days.

Kind of like how people say “then unhappy amazon employees should simply find another job”?

There's a huge imbalance of power between the company and an individual worker. So it's "kind of" not the same at all.

Why are people so quick to defend the powerful?

Re: U.S. Supreme Court rejects Amazon warehouse worker wage appeal

#34

Post by plasticchris » Mon, Oct 07, 2019, 3:40 PM UTC

JMTQp8lwXL wrote: post #21

It sounds like the post-shift screening shouldn't be necessary. If they're not paying you, you should be free to go. The worker should try opting-out of the screening: it should be an OSHA issue if you can't freely leave the building at anytime.

Most likely they are an at will employee in the USA so they would just be fired.

Re: U.S. Supreme Court rejects Amazon warehouse worker wage appeal

#35

Post by korzun » Mon, Oct 07, 2019, 3:44 PM UTC

JMTQp8lwXL wrote: post #21

It sounds like the post-shift screening shouldn't be necessary. If they're not paying you, you should be free to go. The worker should try opting-out of the screening: it should be an OSHA issue if you can't freely leave the building at anytime.

> it should be an OSHA issue if you can't freely leave the building at anytime

Why in the world would that be an OSHA issue?

Re: U.S. Supreme Court rejects Amazon warehouse worker wage appeal

#36

Post by paxys » Mon, Oct 07, 2019, 3:44 PM UTC

JMTQp8lwXL wrote: post #21

It sounds like the post-shift screening shouldn't be necessary. If they're not paying you, you should be free to go. The worker should try opting-out of the screening: it should be an OSHA issue if you can't freely leave the building at anytime.

"Sure you are free to go. And don't bother showing up tomorrow."

Re: U.S. Supreme Court rejects Amazon warehouse worker wage appeal

#37

Post by mentat » Mon, Oct 07, 2019, 3:47 PM UTC

tom_mellior wrote: post #28

FPGAhacker wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not that it is the supreme court's fault, assuming that test is very explicit in the act. But seriously, could that test be any more absurd? The test should not be "of Amazon could eliminate screenings with out affecting the primary job." It should be if the employee could choose not to participate without it affecting their job. It's the difference between voluntary and compelled.

> Not that it is the supreme court's fault, assuming that test is very explicit in the act. Couldn't the Supreme Court declare the test unconstitutional?

On what basis?

Re: U.S. Supreme Court rejects Amazon warehouse worker wage appeal

#38

Post by notyourwork » Mon, Oct 07, 2019, 3:47 PM UTC

trenning wrote: post #24

Is it not crazy that is has to come down to a Supreme Court case for Jeff Bezos and Amazon to treat their employees fairly? This isn't a company that's on a sink or swim margin where this will collapse the company. Not when they're fine stocking all the break rooms in corporate offices with starbucks and AWS people get shelves full snacks all day. But give an hourly employee a little more money to accommodate their s…

Snacks and coffee are laughable costs compared to salaries.

Re: U.S. Supreme Court rejects Amazon warehouse worker wage appeal

#39

Post by goto11 » Mon, Oct 07, 2019, 3:47 PM UTC

jbob2000 wrote: post #10

FPGAhacker wrote: post #5

It seems eminently reasonable and obvious that workers should be compensated for performing the Duties of their job while at work or in premises. Clearly submitting to a security check before being allowed to leave work is an obligation they incur as an employee. They should not be able to “clock out” until after such security checks.

I get what you're saying, but these are the ways that management finds the margins that allow you to receive cheap products on your doorstep in 2 days.

I don't see how it should affect the speed of delivery that the Amazon employees gets paid for their time? But yeah it might affect the price - or Amazon might be able to optimize the "security check" if they have to compensate workers for the wasted time.

Re: U.S. Supreme Court rejects Amazon warehouse worker wage appeal

#40

Post by SmellyGeekBoy » Mon, Oct 07, 2019, 3:48 PM UTC

colinj2 wrote: post #31

tom_mellior wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> hired to retrieve products from warehouse shelves, not to undergo security screenings, and the company could eliminate the screenings altogether without impairing the employees’ ability to complete their work Wow. They were hired to do work, not to be locked up for half an hour per day and treated like criminals. Moreover, it is obviously clear that Amazon could just stop locking them up for half an hour per day an…

It’s seems degrading to be subject to this but at the same time the majority of theft is from employees. I’ve hear about these type of precautions at UPS sorting centers. It’s also why cash register security cameras are pointed at the register not where a robber would be in clear view. That said I’m almost certain the UPS employees are paid while doing the screening. That’s a benefit of labor unions.

Indeed. I've worked in electronics and home entertainment retail in the past and been subject to similar checks. The majority of theft is indeed carried out by employees.