Apple to pay $30M to retail employees for off-the-clock bag, device searches
Apple has offered to pay $30 million in a settlement with retail employees who claimed they were subject to routine, off-the-clock searches of their bags before leaving work.
Credit: Laurenz Heymann/Unsplash
Lawyers for the Apple staffers urged the court to approve the $29.9 million settlement, calling it a "significant, non-reversionary settlement reached after nearly eight years of hard-fought litigation," Courthouse News reported Friday.
The lawsuit originated in 2013, when a class of employees sued Apple, arguing that they should be paid for the time spent undergoing security checks of their bags and devices. The torturous case has been through both the Ninth Circuit, as well as the California Supreme Court, which ruled in February 2020that Apple should be on the hook for mandatory searches.
In the California Supreme Court ruling, justices criticized Apple for its seemingly inconsistent arguments regarding iPhones and other devices. During the legal dispute, Apple argued that employees could have left their devices at home to avoid them being searched.
"The irony and inconsistency of Apple's argument must be noted. Its characterization of the iPhone as unnecessary for its own employees is directly at odds with its description of the iPhone as an 'integrated and integral' part of the lives of everyone else," wrote California Supreme Court Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye.
Apple implemented the practice in 2013, requiring that employees complied with the regulation or face termination. The court found that Apple wielded control over employees, forcing them to find a manager or security guard before they could leave a retail store for breaks or shift ends.
Retail workers had to open compartments in their bags and follow the commands of searches. They also had to allow their Apple products to be inspected and verified during the searches.
Apple argued that it didn't control its employees during searches, and they were free to leave their bags at home to avoid them.
The California Supreme Court disagreed with that characterization, and referred to a legal requirement in the state's wage law that indicates employees should be entitled to compensation during the time they are subject to a company's control.
"Applying a strictly textual analysis, Apple employees are clearly under Apple's control while awaiting, and during, the exit searches. Apple controls its employees during this time in several ways," Cantil-Sakauye wrote.
Employees in the class of nearly 12,000 current and former Apple Store staffers in California can stand to receive a maximum payment of about $1,200, if the settlement is approved.
Read on AppleInsider
Credit: Laurenz Heymann/Unsplash
Lawyers for the Apple staffers urged the court to approve the $29.9 million settlement, calling it a "significant, non-reversionary settlement reached after nearly eight years of hard-fought litigation," Courthouse News reported Friday.
The lawsuit originated in 2013, when a class of employees sued Apple, arguing that they should be paid for the time spent undergoing security checks of their bags and devices. The torturous case has been through both the Ninth Circuit, as well as the California Supreme Court, which ruled in February 2020that Apple should be on the hook for mandatory searches.
In the California Supreme Court ruling, justices criticized Apple for its seemingly inconsistent arguments regarding iPhones and other devices. During the legal dispute, Apple argued that employees could have left their devices at home to avoid them being searched.
"The irony and inconsistency of Apple's argument must be noted. Its characterization of the iPhone as unnecessary for its own employees is directly at odds with its description of the iPhone as an 'integrated and integral' part of the lives of everyone else," wrote California Supreme Court Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye.
Apple implemented the practice in 2013, requiring that employees complied with the regulation or face termination. The court found that Apple wielded control over employees, forcing them to find a manager or security guard before they could leave a retail store for breaks or shift ends.
Retail workers had to open compartments in their bags and follow the commands of searches. They also had to allow their Apple products to be inspected and verified during the searches.
Apple argued that it didn't control its employees during searches, and they were free to leave their bags at home to avoid them.
The California Supreme Court disagreed with that characterization, and referred to a legal requirement in the state's wage law that indicates employees should be entitled to compensation during the time they are subject to a company's control.
"Applying a strictly textual analysis, Apple employees are clearly under Apple's control while awaiting, and during, the exit searches. Apple controls its employees during this time in several ways," Cantil-Sakauye wrote.
Employees in the class of nearly 12,000 current and former Apple Store staffers in California can stand to receive a maximum payment of about $1,200, if the settlement is approved.
Read on AppleInsider
Comments
if you’re getting paid for it, you could presumably make a little extra cash or work a little less if you always brought a whole bunch of stuff that was onerous to search.
So it's not just while your bags are being frisked here in Canada, it's also when you are outside the building on company property. But there are not many people who know this, so they probably claim sick leave if they are injured on a company-owned parking lot.
If Apple requires you to be present and participate in an activity, whether you are on the floor selling or in the bathroom farting, you get paid. It's plain and simple. If they demand something of the employees that takes their private time, you pay. Contrary to what you think, it doesn't matter whether or not it is five seconds, five minutes or five hours.
I find it stunning that you have made a real effort to picture the employees who want to be paid for a mandatory activity as the bad guys. It's insulting.
This is the kind f stuff that will lead to a union shop. I'd love to hear how someone who has opinions like yours would like that.
Different industries have different policies to minimize employees taking advantage of the system. Ever go to a restaurant or bar and see security cameras? A lot of these are to monitor employees not guests.
Heck, the modern restaurant POS system is designed to prevent some waiter from walking to the kitchen and saying "Hey, fire a 32 ounce porterhouse" and not entering the order into the system, then pocketing the money. No ticket, no food.
I still benefit from my regular bartenders comping me drinks. The industry calls this "tip enhancement." The restaurants in question probably still know that it's happening. Some places have flow meters on beer lines. Fine dining restaurant workers get checked to make sure they aren't walking away with $200 tins of caviar or $500 bottles of wine.
Note that the bag check policy isn't what was being contested. The problem was that Apple's enforcement outside of the timecard. Apple employees were off the clock then being forced to wait for a company activity. Employees basically should be paid when they are doing things that the company requires them to do.
Whether you sell electronic gadgets, jewelry, whatever, these are the same. Counting your cash drawer at the end of the shift is the same.
There are worker protection laws for this type of thing and that's why Apple is settling. It's not much different than a company compensating employees for making employees working through rightful breaks or overtime.
Note that a company doesn't make every employee theft public. Let's say some Apple employee is stealing Apple Store gift card activation codes or some hotel employee is stealing VIP lounge passes. Their names aren't going to hit the front pages. A lot of this monitoring is a deterrent.
Second, if a person has to stay at the job as part of their employment for any reason that is not their choice (paperwork, emails, training, meeting), they should be paid for that time. If a person is waiting more than 5 minutes per shift, not even including if they have to wait for this bag check to take breaks, that quickly adds up to unpaid time over the course of the year that can equal anywhere from $500-2000 a year depending on the employees hourly wage. Again, that's not even including if they are subjected to the same policy to take breaks as well.
It's not reasonable to ask someone not to bring their own bag for personal items to work, especially for women, that's silly and you and Apple look silly for suggesting something like that. People may need hygiene products, medication, be going to school before/after, etc.