The law is really old and really simple so it's amazing how screwed up it gets at some companies.
If you are paid hourly you must be paid the same rate for all hours you work plus 50% for any hours past 40 in a week.
If you are paid salary you've agreed to a certain amount of money no matter how many hours you put in.
That's it. You are either hourly or you are salary. Your status can't go back and forth for different tasks. The boss can't give you a special extra project and say you get a flat fee for that task on top of your regular hours. The boss can't say a certain set of hours you worked doesn't count because of whatever excuse. The boss can't look at all the overtime you racked up and retroactively reclassify you as salary. There really aren't any loopholes.
No, they can't prove it because Apple holds their timecards.
Wait, scratch that, it should be on their pay stubs I think.
Pay stubs contain insufficient information for the court. It would include what they were paid, and possibly the total hours compensated for. It would not contain the more trusted/favored and detailed extemporaneous log (timecard in this instance) required by courts. That would contain the daily accrued hours, possibly by project/task, and supervisor(s) signature(s).
A prominent desktop publishing software company made the QA team all "QA Engineers" back before 2000 and stopped paying them overtime. Someone reported them to the Feds and the feds made them pay them over time. So if you are not a valid exempt employee (i.e. software engineer) then you can have a case with the feds.
The software Engineers did not get back pay.
By the way most of the QA team lost there jobs just as they got the checks cut under the guise of "Were moving QA to India".
So this lawyer basically has to take his clients' word for it until they can get Apple to come forward with the time records - assuming accurate time records were kept.
Pay stubs contain insufficient information for the court. It would include what they were paid, and possibly the total hours compensated for. It would not contain the more trusted/favored and detailed extemporaneous log (timecard in this instance) required by courts. That would contain the daily accrued hours, possibly by project/task, and supervisor(s) signature(s).
Just a followup, having both run and owned 2000+ employee high-tech companies, professional management utilizes detailed timecards to track budgets, feed decision tools, and to make prudent adjustments. Requiring employees to work additional nn hours, i.e., "doing it for the team", "be happy you have a job", etc. without compensation, whether in immediate payment/bonus/deferred compensation/agreed to compensation-in-kind/stock or options, is manipulative, dishonest, theft, demoralizing and not representative of leadership. Typically this is employed to cover up management planning or operational deficiencies. It certainly skews the picture of the total health of a company.
So this lawyer basically has to take his clients' word for it until they can get Apple to come forward with the time records - assuming accurate time records were kept.
Doesn't sound as though you've ever retained an attorney.
+1 and I share you situation (consulting?). I often come across articles of people bit*ing about working 10 extra hours over one month and not getting paid. We're usually in a good spot when we're "only" working 50hrs / week. Lolol
Life is exactly as you describe it... and yes, I'm a consultant.
First of all, if it weren't for the assistance of France, the colonial revolt that resulted in the creation of the U.S. and its Constitution would have almost certainly have failed. Perhaps another later revolt might have succeeded or the colonies might have achieved independence in another way, but there's no certainty that the country you live in would be the same one you are lucky enough to live in today. So, the next time you want to bash the French, why don't you just show a little gratitude for the privileged life you live instead.
Secondly, I think it's a pretty safe assumption that you are being compensated at a considerably higher rate than the average hourly employee. So, instead of ridiculing those who are paid hourly at lower rates, again, why don't consider how lucky you are for your good fortune.
Lastly, while I make no judgment on the validity of the claims against Apple, for those who are paid hourly, the problem of employers stealing labor by not fully compensating them for the time worked is not an uncommon occurrence.
And, frankly, I think you'd be crying pretty hard yourself if your employer decided to not pay you the amount that was agreed upon in your next paycheck, or if you're self employed, if your customers helped themselves to a 20% discount.
First... I was speaking about France TODAY and how organized labor reacts when you suggest employees should be allowed to work more than 35 hours a week. I was not talking about how France "saved" us two hundred years ago... nor did I mention how we saved France multiple times this century. I was speaking about the fact that they really lose their minds if they even think of what life would be like working more than 35 hours a week.
Second... I completely understand the difference between exempt/non-exempt. I've been both for a long time before I left to work on my own. The problem is THIS SPECIFIC case. There appears to be exactly NOTHING to this story. This is a former employee that is pissed off for whatever reason (or a profession litigator). I'm pretty sure if it was a problem while he was an employee... he should have made it an issue back then. Instead... we get this.
Can't the plaintiff file a subpoena to get their timecards from Apple?
I believe that was implied when the article said they expect to get data from Apple during the discovery phase which will support their position. They have to file the lawsuit first, and then request the documents via discovery.
The suit was a bit vague as to why the plantiff feels he is owed over time or specifics as to how Apple kept track of his hours. A previous poster stated that in his experience as an early Apple Store employee it was pretty informal. If that is still the case, it's concievable that there is a manager at an Appe Store (if that's where this was) who keeps asking his employees to stay an extra hour here or there. If that's not recorded anyplace, he's going to have a tough case.
If they do have a timecard system, it's also possible that a manager is telling people to punch out and then get back to work. Or they are only entering 40 hours in the payroll system when the timecard says 45 hours. Wouldn't be the first time we've heard of things like that happening. Maybe Apple just has a bad manager at one of their stores. That doesn't mean Apple is systematically trying to screw people out of their paychecks.
We also don't know if they guy tried to resolve the problem with Apple's HR or payroll departments. Maybe he was incompetent and was fired, and now has an ax to grind. Maybe he quit for a completely unrelated reason, and now he can't find a new job so he's trying to squeeze a few more bucks out of Apple.
First of all, if it weren't for the assistance of France, the colonial revolt that resulted in the creation of the U.S. and its Constitution would have almost certainly have failed. Perhaps another later revolt might have succeeded or the colonies might have achieved independence in another way, but there's no certainty that the country you live in would be the same one you are lucky enough to live in today. So, the next time you want to bash the French, why don't you just show a little gratitude for the privileged life you live instead.
Secondly, I think it's a pretty safe assumption that you are being compensated at a considerably higher rate than the average hourly employee. So, instead of ridiculing those who are paid hourly at lower rates, again, why don't consider how lucky you are for your good fortune.
Lastly, while I make no judgment on the validity of the claims against Apple, for those who are paid hourly, the problem of employers stealing labor by not fully compensating them for the time worked is not an uncommon occurrence.
And, frankly, I think you'd be crying pretty hard yourself if your employer decided to not pay you the amount that was agreed upon in your next paycheck, or if you're self employed, if your customers helped themselves to a 20% discount.
I agree with VinitaBoy we have repaid any debts we had with our involvement in the two world wars. I no this is not politically correct but my experiences with the French have shown them to be arrogant, rude, cheap, boorish and wimps.
I agree with VinitaBoy we have repaid any debts we had with our involvement in the two world wars. I no this is not politically correct but my experiences with the French have shown them to be arrogant, rude, cheap, boorish and wimps.
I'm a professional (exempt) at a chemical company. Our standard work week is 37.5 hours. However, more often than not, I am putting in 50+ hours per week in order to get my work done. My salary reflects the fact that I am "expected" to work more than 37.5 hours if the need arises.
We have non-exempt technologists in our laboratories. Their standard work week is also 37.5 hours. If a non-exempt works more than 37.5 hours, they are required to submit for overtime pay. However, they must get approval from their supervisor prior to working any overtime hours.
There are some non-exempts who work "overtime" just to get "caught up" or "ahead" in their work-load. But, they do not get approval from their supervisor, and subsequently don't get paid for the overtime hours.
We have had in the past, non-exempts who were let go for performance related issues and then tried to sue for unpaid "overtime" hours...even though the overtime hours they worked were not approved, and not recorded.
Where the problem lies, is if the company "requires" non-exempts to work overtime, and then doesn't pay them for the additional hours worked.
I don't care if you work 70 hours per week. You're a complete moron if, as a non-exempt (hourly employee), you don't track those 30 hours of overtime.
Whether it's time and a half or some other rate, depending on the State you reside, you are entitled to being properly compensated.
However, you cannot just claim this without proof; and as I mentioned in another comment, you would be filing grievances from the first week onward about not getting paid for overtime, if you actually worked overtime.
Then again, a salaried employee that works 70 hours is a bigger moron, for not being sharp enough to know the law of diminishing returns on extended hours concerned with performance efficiencies and health.
Agreed, your just hurting yourself with this dream that all hard working people don't claim overtime. You might not claim it, but Joe Smoe next door, who is doing the same overtime is claiming it and profitting by it. As well, the company isn't going to care about your health. Eventually these type of employees, that do OT for free, learn it isn't worth it. The company as well may not even know your doing this "hard work" if you don't claim the overtime.
As a supervisor of employees I've seen too many times when an employee can't say "No" to her colleagues, and ends up doing OT for free, then having health problem and realizing it ain't worth it.
As a business owner, FLSA compliance is really tricky. I have a consulting engineering firm; for us about half the office is clearly exempt or non-exempt and the other half is somewhere in the middle. We end up with three classes of people: non-exempt with time-and-a-half OT, exempt with straight-time OT, and exempt with no OT, and try to match the best practices of similar employers in the area.
You could be exempt if you make twice minimum wage, and meet certain other criteria such as specialized training or certifications. Does a college degree count? Does it have to be an ABET college? Did you have to pass your EIT? It really is a mess.
If Apple classified the employees non-exempt and did not pay them time-and-a-half OT, then they are clearly at fault. What I see much more often is that employers get dinged for "wrongly" classifying employees as exempt.
Agreed, your just hurting yourself with this dream that all hard working people don't claim overtime. You might not claim it, but Joe Smoe next door, who is doing the same overtime is claiming it and profitting by it. As well, the company isn't going to care about your health. Eventually these type of employees, that do OT for free, learn it isn't worth it. The company as well may not even know your doing this "hard work" if you don't claim the overtime.
I'll add a caveat on that one; if you are doing OT, someone should know. If you want to get paid, you better count it. If you want the professional development and hope to make the money back in Bonus, your supervisor (and ideally their supervisor) needs to know.
Many companies (mine included) send mixed messages on billing overtime. For employees that should be exempt (irregardless of FLSA) that get hourly OT, I am happy to pay for hours worked, but it has to be reasonable and I really would prefer to not pay for your learning curve or voluntary lunch seminars you attend. If you are burning the midnight oil because you goofed off for two hours during the day, I don't want to see that either. If you screwed up and have to re-work something after hours... I am a little begrudging.
When you talk about 1.5x OT, 8-hour days, and some of the other crap, well, I get much more sensitive about it; it gets out of hand too quickly.
I agree with VinitaBoy we have repaid any debts we had with our involvement in the two world wars. I no this is not politically correct but my experiences with the French have shown them to be arrogant, rude, cheap, boorish and wimps.
And what exact experiences would those have been? Having spent 10 days in France recently I found them charming, intelligent, and very classy, both in the countryside and in the heart of Paris.
Suits like this are filed every day, and that's the way it's supposed to be. Courts are there to settle intractable questions of fact and law. The plaintiff says he was "required" to work overtime hours but wasn't compensated for them. He, not unreasonably in my opinion, doesn't have records that provide all the details and asks the court to compel Apple to provide such records through the discovery process. Again, that's how the system works, nothing to get excited about here. Frankly I think he'll have a hard time making a case based on data that Apple provides, because I expect the data will be internally consistent. That is, if Apple recorded that the plaintiff worked 60 hours in a given week, he was almost certainly paid for 60 hours (to not do so would be incredibly stupid). The reason question will likely come down to whether the employee was required to work overtime hours that were never recorded. So then they would be looking for an email or memo referring to that (illegal) practice. I doubt this is a frivilous case, because it will be a hard case to win. If they can't prove there was wrongdoing it will be an expensive waste of time. And if Apple has good records and good management practices they will win easily. So let it go to trial and see what shakes out.
Agreed, your just hurting yourself with this dream that all hard working people don't claim overtime. You might not claim it, but Joe Smoe next door, who is doing the same overtime is claiming it and profitting by it. As well, the company isn't going to care about your health. Eventually these type of employees, that do OT for free, learn it isn't worth it. The company as well may not even know your doing this "hard work" if you don't claim the overtime.
As a supervisor of employees I've seen too many times when an employee can't say "No" to her colleagues, and ends up doing OT for free, then having health problem and realizing it ain't worth it.
It kind of sounds like my dad. I'm very afraid that he's literally going to work himself to death sometimes.
Comments
Oh yeah, my heart bleeds for them. All those extra hours "working" at the golf course, sucking down martinis, is a real bitch. Absolutely exhausting.
Why, they aught to sue!
My extra hours put in each week certainly aren't that way. More like sitting behind the desk trying to get numbers to cooperate for hours.
No salaried employee gets overtime pay. I would assume this guy was salaried.
If you are paid hourly you must be paid the same rate for all hours you work plus 50% for any hours past 40 in a week.
If you are paid salary you've agreed to a certain amount of money no matter how many hours you put in.
That's it. You are either hourly or you are salary. Your status can't go back and forth for different tasks. The boss can't give you a special extra project and say you get a flat fee for that task on top of your regular hours. The boss can't say a certain set of hours you worked doesn't count because of whatever excuse. The boss can't look at all the overtime you racked up and retroactively reclassify you as salary. There really aren't any loopholes.
No, they can't prove it because Apple holds their timecards.
Wait, scratch that, it should be on their pay stubs I think.
Pay stubs contain insufficient information for the court. It would include what they were paid, and possibly the total hours compensated for. It would not contain the more trusted/favored and detailed extemporaneous log (timecard in this instance) required by courts. That would contain the daily accrued hours, possibly by project/task, and supervisor(s) signature(s).
The software Engineers did not get back pay.
By the way most of the QA team lost there jobs just as they got the checks cut under the guise of "Were moving QA to India".
Can you guess what company this is?
Pay stubs contain insufficient information for the court. It would include what they were paid, and possibly the total hours compensated for. It would not contain the more trusted/favored and detailed extemporaneous log (timecard in this instance) required by courts. That would contain the daily accrued hours, possibly by project/task, and supervisor(s) signature(s).
Just a followup, having both run and owned 2000+ employee high-tech companies, professional management utilizes detailed timecards to track budgets, feed decision tools, and to make prudent adjustments. Requiring employees to work additional nn hours, i.e., "doing it for the team", "be happy you have a job", etc. without compensation, whether in immediate payment/bonus/deferred compensation/agreed to compensation-in-kind/stock or options, is manipulative, dishonest, theft, demoralizing and not representative of leadership. Typically this is employed to cover up management planning or operational deficiencies. It certainly skews the picture of the total health of a company.
So this lawyer basically has to take his clients' word for it until they can get Apple to come forward with the time records - assuming accurate time records were kept.
Doesn't sound as though you've ever retained an attorney.
Doesn't sound as though you've ever retained an attorney.
No, I haven't. Have you?
+1 and I share you situation (consulting?). I often come across articles of people bit*ing about working 10 extra hours over one month and not getting paid. We're usually in a good spot when we're "only" working 50hrs / week. Lolol
Life is exactly as you describe it... and yes, I'm a consultant.
First of all, if it weren't for the assistance of France, the colonial revolt that resulted in the creation of the U.S. and its Constitution would have almost certainly have failed. Perhaps another later revolt might have succeeded or the colonies might have achieved independence in another way, but there's no certainty that the country you live in would be the same one you are lucky enough to live in today. So, the next time you want to bash the French, why don't you just show a little gratitude for the privileged life you live instead.
Secondly, I think it's a pretty safe assumption that you are being compensated at a considerably higher rate than the average hourly employee. So, instead of ridiculing those who are paid hourly at lower rates, again, why don't consider how lucky you are for your good fortune.
Lastly, while I make no judgment on the validity of the claims against Apple, for those who are paid hourly, the problem of employers stealing labor by not fully compensating them for the time worked is not an uncommon occurrence.
And, frankly, I think you'd be crying pretty hard yourself if your employer decided to not pay you the amount that was agreed upon in your next paycheck, or if you're self employed, if your customers helped themselves to a 20% discount.
First... I was speaking about France TODAY and how organized labor reacts when you suggest employees should be allowed to work more than 35 hours a week. I was not talking about how France "saved" us two hundred years ago... nor did I mention how we saved France multiple times this century. I was speaking about the fact that they really lose their minds if they even think of what life would be like working more than 35 hours a week.
Second... I completely understand the difference between exempt/non-exempt. I've been both for a long time before I left to work on my own. The problem is THIS SPECIFIC case. There appears to be exactly NOTHING to this story. This is a former employee that is pissed off for whatever reason (or a profession litigator). I'm pretty sure if it was a problem while he was an employee... he should have made it an issue back then. Instead... we get this.
Can't the plaintiff file a subpoena to get their timecards from Apple?
I believe that was implied when the article said they expect to get data from Apple during the discovery phase which will support their position. They have to file the lawsuit first, and then request the documents via discovery.
The suit was a bit vague as to why the plantiff feels he is owed over time or specifics as to how Apple kept track of his hours. A previous poster stated that in his experience as an early Apple Store employee it was pretty informal. If that is still the case, it's concievable that there is a manager at an Appe Store (if that's where this was) who keeps asking his employees to stay an extra hour here or there. If that's not recorded anyplace, he's going to have a tough case.
If they do have a timecard system, it's also possible that a manager is telling people to punch out and then get back to work. Or they are only entering 40 hours in the payroll system when the timecard says 45 hours. Wouldn't be the first time we've heard of things like that happening. Maybe Apple just has a bad manager at one of their stores. That doesn't mean Apple is systematically trying to screw people out of their paychecks.
We also don't know if they guy tried to resolve the problem with Apple's HR or payroll departments. Maybe he was incompetent and was fired, and now has an ax to grind. Maybe he quit for a completely unrelated reason, and now he can't find a new job so he's trying to squeeze a few more bucks out of Apple.
First of all, if it weren't for the assistance of France, the colonial revolt that resulted in the creation of the U.S. and its Constitution would have almost certainly have failed. Perhaps another later revolt might have succeeded or the colonies might have achieved independence in another way, but there's no certainty that the country you live in would be the same one you are lucky enough to live in today. So, the next time you want to bash the French, why don't you just show a little gratitude for the privileged life you live instead.
Secondly, I think it's a pretty safe assumption that you are being compensated at a considerably higher rate than the average hourly employee. So, instead of ridiculing those who are paid hourly at lower rates, again, why don't consider how lucky you are for your good fortune.
Lastly, while I make no judgment on the validity of the claims against Apple, for those who are paid hourly, the problem of employers stealing labor by not fully compensating them for the time worked is not an uncommon occurrence.
And, frankly, I think you'd be crying pretty hard yourself if your employer decided to not pay you the amount that was agreed upon in your next paycheck, or if you're self employed, if your customers helped themselves to a 20% discount.
I agree with VinitaBoy we have repaid any debts we had with our involvement in the two world wars. I no this is not politically correct but my experiences with the French have shown them to be arrogant, rude, cheap, boorish and wimps.
I agree with VinitaBoy we have repaid any debts we had with our involvement in the two world wars. I no this is not politically correct but my experiences with the French have shown them to be arrogant, rude, cheap, boorish and wimps.
I got it bad enough just calling them lazy...
We have non-exempt technologists in our laboratories. Their standard work week is also 37.5 hours. If a non-exempt works more than 37.5 hours, they are required to submit for overtime pay. However, they must get approval from their supervisor prior to working any overtime hours.
There are some non-exempts who work "overtime" just to get "caught up" or "ahead" in their work-load. But, they do not get approval from their supervisor, and subsequently don't get paid for the overtime hours.
We have had in the past, non-exempts who were let go for performance related issues and then tried to sue for unpaid "overtime" hours...even though the overtime hours they worked were not approved, and not recorded.
Where the problem lies, is if the company "requires" non-exempts to work overtime, and then doesn't pay them for the additional hours worked.
I don't care if you work 70 hours per week. You're a complete moron if, as a non-exempt (hourly employee), you don't track those 30 hours of overtime.
Whether it's time and a half or some other rate, depending on the State you reside, you are entitled to being properly compensated.
However, you cannot just claim this without proof; and as I mentioned in another comment, you would be filing grievances from the first week onward about not getting paid for overtime, if you actually worked overtime.
Then again, a salaried employee that works 70 hours is a bigger moron, for not being sharp enough to know the law of diminishing returns on extended hours concerned with performance efficiencies and health.
Agreed, your just hurting yourself with this dream that all hard working people don't claim overtime. You might not claim it, but Joe Smoe next door, who is doing the same overtime is claiming it and profitting by it. As well, the company isn't going to care about your health. Eventually these type of employees, that do OT for free, learn it isn't worth it. The company as well may not even know your doing this "hard work" if you don't claim the overtime.
As a supervisor of employees I've seen too many times when an employee can't say "No" to her colleagues, and ends up doing OT for free, then having health problem and realizing it ain't worth it.
You could be exempt if you make twice minimum wage, and meet certain other criteria such as specialized training or certifications. Does a college degree count? Does it have to be an ABET college? Did you have to pass your EIT? It really is a mess.
If Apple classified the employees non-exempt and did not pay them time-and-a-half OT, then they are clearly at fault. What I see much more often is that employers get dinged for "wrongly" classifying employees as exempt.
Agreed, your just hurting yourself with this dream that all hard working people don't claim overtime. You might not claim it, but Joe Smoe next door, who is doing the same overtime is claiming it and profitting by it. As well, the company isn't going to care about your health. Eventually these type of employees, that do OT for free, learn it isn't worth it. The company as well may not even know your doing this "hard work" if you don't claim the overtime.
I'll add a caveat on that one; if you are doing OT, someone should know. If you want to get paid, you better count it. If you want the professional development and hope to make the money back in Bonus, your supervisor (and ideally their supervisor) needs to know.
Many companies (mine included) send mixed messages on billing overtime. For employees that should be exempt (irregardless of FLSA) that get hourly OT, I am happy to pay for hours worked, but it has to be reasonable and I really would prefer to not pay for your learning curve or voluntary lunch seminars you attend. If you are burning the midnight oil because you goofed off for two hours during the day, I don't want to see that either. If you screwed up and have to re-work something after hours... I am a little begrudging.
When you talk about 1.5x OT, 8-hour days, and some of the other crap, well, I get much more sensitive about it; it gets out of hand too quickly.
I agree with VinitaBoy we have repaid any debts we had with our involvement in the two world wars. I no this is not politically correct but my experiences with the French have shown them to be arrogant, rude, cheap, boorish and wimps.
And what exact experiences would those have been? Having spent 10 days in France recently I found them charming, intelligent, and very classy, both in the countryside and in the heart of Paris.
Agreed, your just hurting yourself with this dream that all hard working people don't claim overtime. You might not claim it, but Joe Smoe next door, who is doing the same overtime is claiming it and profitting by it. As well, the company isn't going to care about your health. Eventually these type of employees, that do OT for free, learn it isn't worth it. The company as well may not even know your doing this "hard work" if you don't claim the overtime.
As a supervisor of employees I've seen too many times when an employee can't say "No" to her colleagues, and ends up doing OT for free, then having health problem and realizing it ain't worth it.
It kind of sounds like my dad. I'm very afraid that he's literally going to work himself to death sometimes.