IMO There's zero danger of everyone bringing a bag to work so they can hang around and have it searched after their shift is over. Most folks in retail/service settings that I've been part of are anxious to get home after a shift and many won't hang around even one minute longer than they have to. Relatively easy to deal with that rare employee that consistently abuses the policy. Same way management deals with any other problem employee.
Bu since you raised the issue of a contract that's the perfect place to compromise. Set a reasonable time of say 3 minutes past shift end and put it in writing. If the manager hasn't yet taken the time to check the employee out they remain on the clock until he/she does. Is that unreasonable?
If all bag searches must be done on the clock, then employees must hang around if their bags already got searched and it's not yet the end of their shift. That's because the employer must begin the search early enough so that all the bags are searched before the end of shift. Thus the first employees that have their bag searched must hang around until the end of their shift. All the while getting paid.
If employees are getting OT, you bet employees will not mind hanging around after their shift ends and before their bags get searched because they are still on the clock getting paid OT for the time it takes for their bag to get searched. Plus there is no compromise when it comes to OT after 8 hours work. An employee can not bargain that away unless made exempt. And an employer can not take it away. FLSA will not allow it.
There's already a 5 minute leeway on clock rings for an 8 hour day under FLSA. This to compensate for early and late clock rings due to wait at the time clock. So an employee that has a day clock rings totaling up to 7 hours and 55 minutes or 8 hours and 5 minutes will have their time rounded to 8 hours. Over the span of a pay period or two, the under clock rings and over clock rings should average out to 8 hours a day. But employees that already have over clock rings during the day will not have the full 5 minutes after their shift and may even already be over the allowed 5 minutes leeway even if he/she clocks out on time at the end of shift.
It would entirely proper for Apple Retail to expect employees to incur the inconvenience of a few minutes of bag checks to trade off against the convenience of their being allowed to bring bags to work, as long as it was specified in the employment contract up front. Losses from retail theft are huge, and I would expect my managers to not only care about it, but also strictly enforce that rule.
Excellent edit sir. Addressing that in a contract between the employee and Apple would help. I'll assume you're familiar with 'consideration" as it applies to contract law, and if not it's really easy to find. In a nutshell an enforceable contract is essentially a set of trade-off promises. If you do this, then I'll do that. Both should benefit.
So that there's a responsibility and benefit for both parties set an allowable number of unpaid minutes for a manager check and after that the employee stays on the clock until it's done. Managers will have an incentive to perform the checks as promptly as possible to avoid questions about excessive hours, and the employee will be more accepting of the minimal unpaid wait times knowing that if the inconvenience is excessive at least they'll be compensated for it.
Does a three minute window sound reasonable? It does to me. If not what sounds fair to you?
*For those that think three minutes is not an inconvenience, as you say "petty", stand up next to your desk/chair/couch for what you think is three minutes. When you believe the time is up check to see how long it actually was. Then consider what you would rather have been doing for those few minutes.
EDIT: [@]anantksundaram[/@], since you raise the issue of employee theft and bag checks I would imagine you'd also expect pocket checks, making sure pilfered items in a male workers pockets is discovered as well as the ladies and their purses/bags. That would certainly be reasonable and in fact not unexpected for a concerned retailer, right? Particularly one that sells expensive pocketable items.
Classic clip! I don't know why I didn't think of that!
That is fair enough.
I think Apple could do a better job of it rather than fighting their front line workers on something so small and petty. I would be shocked if theft at Apple retail stores from customers and employees is above the industry average.
There are better solutions than an unpaid search and Apple of all companies could figure it out. They should want the best possible experience for workers and customers alike.
Say what? Apple isn't "fighting their workers". They faced a law firm and a few disgruntled opportunist ex-employees (who will probably never be hired anywhere again thanks to their lawsuit). Good riddance.
Then she shouldn’t bring in her purse. Problem solved.
So you walk around without a wallet and no ID?
Besides, the issue wasn't about the check per se, although it's still an invasion of privacy. The issue was about whether employees should have been paid for waiting for the bag check. IMO, they should have been, even though the courts ruled otherwise. As an employee, it's either my time or your time. If it's your time, I should be paid. It's not my fault that you conduct the bag check inefficiently. Another way to handle it is that if an employee is scheduled to work 8 hours and the bag check takes 15 minutes, the employee comes off the sales floor at 7 3/4 hours and then goes through the bag check.
As a consultant, I charge my clients from the moment I walk into their building until the moment I leave. If they have me come in, but leave me sitting in a conference room while they get their act together, it's their time and they get charged. It should be no different for an employee, especially an employee who is getting paid by the hour.
And this "if you don't like it, go find another job" attitude is ridiculous. Employees should be treated fairly and with respect. The "if you don't like it" logic would extend to every working condition, including the minimum wage or getting paid at all. "Well, if you don't like working for 25 cents an hour, go find another job." "If you don't like being exposed to dangerous chemicals with no protection, go find another job." Etc. Without legal protections, we become a third world country.
Sorry what? Sorry you can't steal stuff? Sorry you can't take a big bag into the store and not expect to have it seem suspicious? Do you really think you can make some 99% - 1% statement on an Apple fan site, of all places, and have it seem like it is serious? Most Apple users are going to be closer to the higher income strata, right? So Apple should allow employees to steal to provide some kind of false income equality? Why not just allow people to take what they want, from whatever store they want?
Then she shouldn’t bring in her purse. Problem solved.
Solved? What about pockets? If they aren't checked then perhaps the most used storage depot for employee-pilfered goodies, particularly by the male employees, is being ignored. There's a whole lotta expensive Apple products in their store that fit in a pocket just fine. If mitigating Apple employee theft is the priority they're not doing what they should if that theft vector is ignored. In fact I think it more likely an employee would stuff a stolen accessory ,perhaps even a phone, in a pocket rather than a bag that's sure to be checked.
Of course if employees don't want to be delayed for a security check then don't choose to wear something with pockets. I would add a sarcasm tag but that's not really in jest.
EDIT: @anantksundaram, since you raise the issue of employee theft and bag checks I would imagine you'd also expect pocket checks, making sure pilfered items in a male workers pockets is discovered as well as the ladies and their purses/bags. That would certainly be reasonable and in fact not unexpected for a concerned retailer, right? Particularly one that sells expensive pocketable items.
(Note "/sarcasm" tag at end of first sentence).
[SIZE=28px](Note "/sarcasm" tag at end of first sentence).[/SIZE]
That is really tiny. You might consider bumping the size unless the intent is for folks to miss it.
With that said you apparently have no intention of commenting on what you would consider to be an equitable contract agreement regarding security checks and employee payment? As it was you who suggested its inclusion in an employee contract you surely thought about what trade-offs would be required from each party to it.
They aren't according to the employees registering on GlassDoor. The range for Apple Store Concierge positions is $10-$14/hour, and averaging only $11.34. If that's their only income and even working 40 hours a week they would still qualify for government benefits meant to assist the poorest of us.In the meantime Apple has more money just parked in the bank than any company on the planet. What harm would it cause pay the lowest Apple employees for that few minutes a day. Apple execs may carry that much around in their pockets for tip money. (I halfway kid)
Have you never had to worry about a light bill, or ever worked a minimum wage job yourself? Just curious.
I sure did! Jack in the box, $3.35 a hour, though by the time I left to go to school out of state, was working at another jack in the box for $3.90 a hour. Working full time and going to school full time and having a small apartment with a room mate. I t wasn't easy. Some days I skipped sleeping.
Working a Minimum Wage Job is not a future. It's a temp job to move onto something better. Not being paid for searching your bad, big f'in deal. You're not losing much time. It's a part of having a job. I can for example get called to work at a moments notice. Weekend, 10PM. Some type of emergency at work after being called by the Alarm company. I'm not getting paid to get dressed up again, or taking time to drive to work and then back home and the gas it took and my time. Maybe not even any time once I get there if it's a simple thing. Poor Baby, have to wait around for a few minutes maybe for a bag check, a bag you were not forced to bring in the first place.
It is the Entitlement Class these days that's happening.
I sure did! Jack in the box, $3.35 a hour, though by the time I left to go to school out of state, was working at another jack in the box for $3.90 a hour. Working full time and going to school full time and having a small apartment with a room mate. I t wasn't easy. Some days I skipped sleeping.
Working a Minimum Wage Job is not a future. It's a temp job to move onto something better. Not being paid for searching your bad, big f'in deal. You're not losing much time. It's a part of having a job. I can for example get called to work at a moments notice. Weekend, 10PM. Some type of emergency at work after being called by the Alarm company. I'm not getting paid to get dressed up again, or taking time to drive to work and then back home and the gas it took and my time. Maybe not even any time once I get there if it's a simple thing. Poor Baby, have to wait around for a few minutes maybe for a bag check, a bag you were not forced to bring in the first place.
It is the Entitlement Class these days that's happening.
You're not as old as I might have expected. I made no where near that much per hour from my first two jobs.
Sorry about that unpaid on-call time too. Everyone I know that's "on-call", from maintenance workers to nurses to repairmen, are compensated for it whether called to work or not. Actually being called out gets more than their standard pay too as well as oft-times some set pay for travel time. What your employer is doing to you is something I would deem unfair but if you're OK with it that's all that counts. In many cases (not all) it's perfectly legal for your employer not to pay you for time that essentially is not yours to use as you wish but instead benefits the employer.
EDIT: You might want to check the legality of not paying for your travel time if you're required to make service calls to a customer's location. I would be fairly confident in saying a court would find it was illegal for them not to pay you for that expense. Your choice whether to bring it up of course.
Weird. It seems Soli’s earlier upset about your choice of character size was unfounded, because you seem to just be using a different upside down exclamation mark than is usually chosen.
Huddler’s source shows it as a lower-case i, but it’s even SMALLER than a regular i in the source.
Here’s a test. Does this show up large: ¡ and now copying and pasting anant’s character: ?
It looks like anant’s character is subscript, but the source itself says otherwise.
Weird. It seems Soli’s earlier upset about your choice of character size was unfounded, because you seem to just be using a different upside down exclamation mark than is usually chosen.
How is it unfounded when he used a tiny lower-case 'i' that looks like a typo or a smudge on the screen. I do believe I quoted something he intended to be sarcastic, but I didn't know that at the time since he didn't use the inverted exclamation point.
I'm not missing that. The only thing under discussion is pay for a required wait.
Let's assume your employer requires that all bags, containers and pocket contents be checked before leaving, and only by the manager on duty. It's 4:00, and you have an appointment set for 4:30. Since it doesn't cost the company anything if you're delayed for a few minutes your manager sees no pressing need to interrupt her phone call. She feels whatever she's doing is more important. So you wait. . .
20 minutes later she gets around to it. You're late, appointment missed, hope there's' not a fee. Legal? Absolutely. Proper? Again nope. Not to me.
If you knew you had an appointment, why would you bring so much stuff to get checked when you leave?
Besides, the issue wasn't about the check per se, although it's still an invasion of privacy. The issue was about whether employees should have been paid for waiting for the bag check. IMO, they should have been, even though the courts ruled otherwise. As an employee, it's either my time or your time. If it's your time, I should be paid. It's not my fault that you conduct the bag check inefficiently. Another way to handle it is that if an employee is scheduled to work 8 hours and the bag check takes 15 minutes, the employee comes off the sales floor at 7 3/4 hours and then goes through the bag check.
As a consultant, I charge my clients from the moment I walk into their building until the moment I leave. If they have me come in, but leave me sitting in a conference room while they get their act together, it's their time and they get charged. It should be no different for an employee, especially an employee who is getting paid by the hour.
And this "if you don't like it, go find another job" attitude is ridiculous. Employees should be treated fairly and with respect. The "if you don't like it" logic would extend to every working condition, including the minimum wage or getting paid at all. "Well, if you don't like working for 25 cents an hour, go find another job." "If you don't like being exposed to dangerous chemicals with no protection, go find another job." Etc. Without legal protections, we become a third world country.
As a consultant, do you show up hours earlier than scheduled and BS with your client before leaving?
If you want a quick search, don't bring a bag. Problem solved.
All businesses are fiscally responsible for enacting loss prevention strategies. In retail industries employee theft, whether you call it "inventory shrinkage" or whatever, is a reality. Apple could have chosen to enact other strategies or policies like rfid tags or something physically similar but those techniques are disruptive and annoying for customers. Given the choice between alienating nearly all customers and asking employees to step up and be subtly inconvenienced at the end of their shift, Apple chose the more customer friendly solution that also makes better business sense. Put it in the proper perspective. Maintaining the integrity of the business and keeping customers happy is in the best interest of every Apple employee at every level. If they lose customers every Apple employee's job is at risk, even those who aren't in customer facing positions. Any Apple employees who feels like they've been exploited by having to comply with a trivial process that is in place for the benefit of their coworkers, the business, and its customers really needs to recalibrate their place in the bigger picture.
Weird. It seems Soli’s earlier upset about your choice of character size was unfounded, because you seem to just be using a different upside down exclamation mark than is usually chosen.
How is it unfounded when he used a tiny lower-case 'i' that looks like a typo or a smudge on the screen. I do believe I quoted something he intended to be sarcastic, but I didn't know that at the time since he didn't use the inverted exclamation point.
Yes - but I don't think he was trying to conceal it. I had also failed to figure out how to get the inverted exclamation mark until your recent post on option-1 and long-press-!. Not sure how I missed those, but I did.
If you knew you had an appointment, why would you bring so much stuff to get checked when you leave?
If you want a quick search, don't bring a bag. Problem solved.
Well of course it would be the employees fault. Thank goodness for employees they aren't checking pockets too which would generally impact all of them, altho some companies no doubt do. At least those others are now on notice they don't need to be paying their employees waiting for them to be conducted, and can stop doing paying them if they already were. A nice little piece of savings at least for the retailers doing checks.
Comments
IMO There's zero danger of everyone bringing a bag to work so they can hang around and have it searched after their shift is over. Most folks in retail/service settings that I've been part of are anxious to get home after a shift and many won't hang around even one minute longer than they have to. Relatively easy to deal with that rare employee that consistently abuses the policy. Same way management deals with any other problem employee.
Bu since you raised the issue of a contract that's the perfect place to compromise. Set a reasonable time of say 3 minutes past shift end and put it in writing. If the manager hasn't yet taken the time to check the employee out they remain on the clock until he/she does. Is that unreasonable?
If all bag searches must be done on the clock, then employees must hang around if their bags already got searched and it's not yet the end of their shift. That's because the employer must begin the search early enough so that all the bags are searched before the end of shift. Thus the first employees that have their bag searched must hang around until the end of their shift. All the while getting paid.
If employees are getting OT, you bet employees will not mind hanging around after their shift ends and before their bags get searched because they are still on the clock getting paid OT for the time it takes for their bag to get searched. Plus there is no compromise when it comes to OT after 8 hours work. An employee can not bargain that away unless made exempt. And an employer can not take it away. FLSA will not allow it.
There's already a 5 minute leeway on clock rings for an 8 hour day under FLSA. This to compensate for early and late clock rings due to wait at the time clock. So an employee that has a day clock rings totaling up to 7 hours and 55 minutes or 8 hours and 5 minutes will have their time rounded to 8 hours. Over the span of a pay period or two, the under clock rings and over clock rings should average out to 8 hours a day. But employees that already have over clock rings during the day will not have the full 5 minutes after their shift and may even already be over the allowed 5 minutes leeway even if he/she clocks out on time at the end of shift.
So that there's a responsibility and benefit for both parties set an allowable number of unpaid minutes for a manager check and after that the employee stays on the clock until it's done. Managers will have an incentive to perform the checks as promptly as possible to avoid questions about excessive hours, and the employee will be more accepting of the minimal unpaid wait times knowing that if the inconvenience is excessive at least they'll be compensated for it.
Does a three minute window sound reasonable? It does to me. If not what sounds fair to you?
*For those that think three minutes is not an inconvenience, as you say "petty", stand up next to your desk/chair/couch for what you think is three minutes. When you believe the time is up check to see how long it actually was. Then consider what you would rather have been doing for those few minutes.
EDIT: [@]anantksundaram[/@], since you raise the issue of employee theft and bag checks I would imagine you'd also expect pocket checks, making sure pilfered items in a male workers pockets is discovered as well as the ladies and their purses/bags. That would certainly be reasonable and in fact not unexpected for a concerned retailer, right? Particularly one that sells expensive pocketable items.
Say what? Apple isn't "fighting their workers". They faced a law firm and a few disgruntled opportunist ex-employees (who will probably never be hired anywhere again thanks to their lawsuit). Good riddance.
Then she shouldn’t bring in her purse. Problem solved.
So you walk around without a wallet and no ID?
Besides, the issue wasn't about the check per se, although it's still an invasion of privacy. The issue was about whether employees should have been paid for waiting for the bag check. IMO, they should have been, even though the courts ruled otherwise. As an employee, it's either my time or your time. If it's your time, I should be paid. It's not my fault that you conduct the bag check inefficiently. Another way to handle it is that if an employee is scheduled to work 8 hours and the bag check takes 15 minutes, the employee comes off the sales floor at 7 3/4 hours and then goes through the bag check.
As a consultant, I charge my clients from the moment I walk into their building until the moment I leave. If they have me come in, but leave me sitting in a conference room while they get their act together, it's their time and they get charged. It should be no different for an employee, especially an employee who is getting paid by the hour.
And this "if you don't like it, go find another job" attitude is ridiculous. Employees should be treated fairly and with respect. The "if you don't like it" logic would extend to every working condition, including the minimum wage or getting paid at all. "Well, if you don't like working for 25 cents an hour, go find another job." "If you don't like being exposed to dangerous chemicals with no protection, go find another job." Etc. Without legal protections, we become a third world country.
Sorry 99%ers.
Sorry what? Sorry you can't steal stuff? Sorry you can't take a big bag into the store and not expect to have it seem suspicious? Do you really think you can make some 99% - 1% statement on an Apple fan site, of all places, and have it seem like it is serious? Most Apple users are going to be closer to the higher income strata, right? So Apple should allow employees to steal to provide some kind of false income equality? Why not just allow people to take what they want, from whatever store they want?
Actually, yeah. I only ever have what currency I need on me.
They have every right in the world to do it.
Just change policy slightly to cut wait times.
Without legal protections, we become a third world country.
With too much legal “protection”, we become the same.
Of course if employees don't want to be delayed for a security check then don't choose to wear something with pockets. I would add a sarcasm tag but that's not really in jest.
EDIT: @anantksundaram, since you raise the issue of employee theft and bag checks I would imagine you'd also expect pocket checks, making sure pilfered items in a male workers pockets is discovered as well as the ladies and their purses/bags. That would certainly be reasonable and in fact not unexpected for a concerned retailer, right? Particularly one that sells expensive pocketable items.
Oh no, I'd recommend cavity checks too. ?
'Nuff already... let's move on. At least, I am.
(Note "/sarcasm" tag at end of first sentence).
With that said you apparently have no intention of commenting on what you would consider to be an equitable contract agreement regarding security checks and employee payment? As it was you who suggested its inclusion in an employee contract you surely thought about what trade-offs would be required from each party to it.
If they were getting twice the minimum wage. . .
They aren't according to the employees registering on GlassDoor. The range for Apple Store Concierge positions is $10-$14/hour, and averaging only $11.34. If that's their only income and even working 40 hours a week they would still qualify for government benefits meant to assist the poorest of us.In the meantime Apple has more money just parked in the bank than any company on the planet. What harm would it cause pay the lowest Apple employees for that few minutes a day. Apple execs may carry that much around in their pockets for tip money. (I halfway kid)
Have you never had to worry about a light bill, or ever worked a minimum wage job yourself? Just curious.
I sure did! Jack in the box, $3.35 a hour, though by the time I left to go to school out of state, was working at another jack in the box for $3.90 a hour. Working full time and going to school full time and having a small apartment with a room mate. I t wasn't easy. Some days I skipped sleeping.
Working a Minimum Wage Job is not a future. It's a temp job to move onto something better. Not being paid for searching your bad, big f'in deal. You're not losing much time. It's a part of having a job. I can for example get called to work at a moments notice. Weekend, 10PM. Some type of emergency at work after being called by the Alarm company. I'm not getting paid to get dressed up again, or taking time to drive to work and then back home and the gas it took and my time. Maybe not even any time once I get there if it's a simple thing. Poor Baby, have to wait around for a few minutes maybe for a bag check, a bag you were not forced to bring in the first place.
It is the Entitlement Class these days that's happening.
Sorry about that unpaid on-call time too. Everyone I know that's "on-call", from maintenance workers to nurses to repairmen, are compensated for it whether called to work or not. Actually being called out gets more than their standard pay too as well as oft-times some set pay for travel time. What your employer is doing to you is something I would deem unfair but if you're OK with it that's all that counts. In many cases (not all) it's perfectly legal for your employer not to pay you for time that essentially is not yours to use as you wish but instead benefits the employer.
EDIT: You might want to check the legality of not paying for your travel time if you're required to make service calls to a customer's location. I would be fairly confident in saying a court would find it was illegal for them not to pay you for that expense. Your choice whether to bring it up of course.
Apple doesn’t sell them, though.
They do.
http://www.apple.com/shop/mac/mac-accessories/storage?page=2
Anyway, if you have to punch a time clock you have a terrible job. Deal with it.
'Nuff already... let's move on. At least, I am.
(Note "/sarcasm" tag at end of first sentence).
Weird. It seems Soli’s earlier upset about your choice of character size was unfounded, because you seem to just be using a different upside down exclamation mark than is usually chosen.
Huddler’s source shows it as a lower-case i, but it’s even SMALLER than a regular i in the source.
Here’s a test. Does this show up large: ¡ and now copying and pasting anant’s character: ?
It looks like anant’s character is subscript, but the source itself says otherwise.
EDIT: I don't recall his sarcasm tag always being that small in the past tho. Maybe it was.
How is it unfounded when he used a tiny lower-case 'i' that looks like a typo or a smudge on the screen. I do believe I quoted something he intended to be sarcastic, but I didn't know that at the time since he didn't use the inverted exclamation point.
If you knew you had an appointment, why would you bring so much stuff to get checked when you leave?
As a consultant, do you show up hours earlier than scheduled and BS with your client before leaving?
If you want a quick search, don't bring a bag. Problem solved.
Weird. It seems Soli’s earlier upset about your choice of character size was unfounded, because you seem to just be using a different upside down exclamation mark than is usually chosen.
How is it unfounded when he used a tiny lower-case 'i' that looks like a typo or a smudge on the screen. I do believe I quoted something he intended to be sarcastic, but I didn't know that at the time since he didn't use the inverted exclamation point.
Yes - but I don't think he was trying to conceal it. I had also failed to figure out how to get the inverted exclamation mark until your recent post on option-1 and long-press-!. Not sure how I missed those, but I did.