As others have already stated - no company work is being performed.
The company is requiring it so it should be done on company time and not the employees' time. The person checking the bags is in fact doing 'company work' and getting paid to do so then the checkee should be compensated as well.
I don't get it, if these people don't like being searched than why do they work there. I personally wouldn't work for a retail store that didn't trust me and it's more than apparent that these people share my opinions, so why are they still their? Apple isn't going to change their policies so the only my people who will win will be the lawyer's
It's not that they don't like being searched, they don't like being searched on their time.
The company is requiring it so it should be done on company time and not the employees' time. The person checking the bags is in fact doing 'company work' and getting paid to do so then the checkee should be compensated as well.
Seriously? So the security guard should get paid for doing nothing all day while the Apple store employees are tending customers?
It's not that they don't like being searched, they don't like being searched on their time.
I'm sorry what part of the original article did you not understand??
According to court documents unsealed on Wednesday, Apple CEO Tim Cook received personal emails from Apple Store employees regarding bag check policies instituted for security purposes, calling the searches "embarrassing," "demeaning" and "disturbing."
The company is requiring it so it should be done on company time and not the employees' time. The person checking the bags is in fact doing 'company work' and getting paid to do so then the checkee should be compensated as well.
Nope, the person doing the checking is being paid because it in his job description. But no where in the checkee job description does it say that he/she will be paid for the time it takes to check a bag that wasn't necessary for the job. If you don't need the bag, don't bring one into the workplace. If you must, then consider yourself lucky that Apple let you do so. Apple could set up a policy that ban all bags bigger than a certain size from entering the workplace. Unless it contains items needed for the job or related to a disability. Whereby it would be checked while on the clock.
IMO, it's incumbent upon the employer to make the bag check quick. If it takes a minute or two, fine. But once it starts getting up to 15 minutes, that's 75 to 90 minutes a week. That's 59 to 70 hours a year, based on someone who works 47 weeks. Why should an employee have to eat that?
That's an exaggeration by sue happy lawyers. It may take 15 minutes if you're at the end of the line on days that there are a lot of bags to be checked. But are you at the end of the line everyday of the week for a year. If you're in front of the line it may take less than a minute and maybe 5 minutes if you're in the middle of the line. On days you don't bring a bag, there may be no wait at all. And some days there are less bags to be checked so the wait is less than 10 minute from the end of the line. So if you average it out, it might only be 35 minutes a week and 27 hours a year.
To put that in perspective, if it takes a person working on the 20th floor of a office building 5 minutes for the elevator bring him/her down to the lobby, that's also 27 hours a year of non paid time that he/she is required to do while at work. And that don't include the 27hours of non paid time it took to take an elevator to the 20th floor when arriving at work.
But let's not forget about the 5 minutes it took to get from the time clock (after punching out.) to the locker room to retrieve your bag (and maybe another 5 minutes to change out of your uniform). And the 5 minutes it took to get to your car in the company's parking lot. And another 5 minutes to drive out of the lot. All these 5 minutes task leads to a hell of a lot of non paid time over a year while at your job. So that average of 5 minutes a day you need to wait for a bag search, because you brought a bag that wasn't necessary for your job into your workplace, is not going to matter as much as you make it seem.
Simple and fair solution: I have worked in retail, and I fully understand the need for searches, even though it was annoying. So...: I guess the searches are on random days/times, not on everyone every day, correct? Then - just record who is searched (usually done anyways as I remember it), and give them 10minutes of overtime payment, just add it automatically to whatever they clocked out at. Costs the business next to nothing compared to the potential losses, and probably also compared to the cost of the security company doing the search
Our figures actually do show the 75% of shrink is employee theft. 20% accounting error/ procedures not being followed and 5% customer theft. These are actual figures from the retail company I work for. Again though, bag searches are required to be on the clock for us!
Time involved means the time required to do the search. If Apple or any other employer requires an activity from an employee, the employee should be compensated for that activity and any waiting time the employer is responsible for.
I will leave the personal waste ejection activities for you to concern yourself with. But yes, I'm sure there are people who malinger or evade their work responsibilities by doing as you suggest. In my business, anyone who developed such habits would be forced to medically justify them and then seek treatment or be terminated. Medical conditions that prevent a worker from fulfilling their job responsibilities are legally permissible grounds for termination just as being a screw up is. But we are most likely to already know they are not the kind of employee our organization values. We compensate well, have a very good work environment and take good care of our employees and we expect them to fulfill their obligations as we do ours. If they don't they are out.Our business is 17 years old. More than half our work force has been with us 10 or more years.
Does that help your snarky comment and clear up where I stand for you?
I feel like a lot of people are generalizing this so I thought I would speak up. I worked for Apple Retail for many years. They required you to clock out and then come find one of the Managers who had to take 3-5 minutes searching your bag and comparing serial numbers on you're Apple devices to a card that was filled out at a previous date. Sometimes there would only be one manager on duty. When this happened and they were engaged with an upset customer or in the office with the door locked for any number of reasons then you had to wait. This could add 10-45 minutes as I'd personally experienced.
At the end of the day, if I am required to check out with them to keep my job then that is a work requirement and should be on the clock. As soon as I clock out I should be on my time and should be able to leave immediately if I desire. If they were paying you to wait I bet you there would be more incentive for them to get you out of there in a timely fashion! :P
The company is requiring it so it should be done on company time and not the employees' time. The person checking the bags is in fact doing 'company work' and getting paid to do so then the checkee should be compensated as well.
How the F checking people's personal items (bags) is "company work"? Company never requires people to bring bags to work. Let's put it this way: I place 300 packages in my bag to works and it take security 30 min to check all items and I should get paid? Company never asks me to bring my personal belongings to work.
The company is requiring it so it should be done on company time and not the employees' time. The person checking the bags is in fact doing 'company work' and getting paid to do so then the checkee should be compensated as well.
How the F checking people's personal items (bags) is "company work"? Company never requires people to bring bags to work. Let's put it this way: I place 300 packages in my bag to works and it take security 30 min to check all items and I should get paid? Company never asks me to bring my personal belongings to work.
So the person checking the bags isn't doing company work?
So the person checking the bags isn't doing company work?
He means "company work" as it pertain to the people waiting to get their bag checked. The person checking the bags is performing "company work" because it's what he was hired to do and in his job description. That's why the Supreme Court has already ruled, numerous times, that companies don't have to pay their employees for the time it takes to check personal bags that are not required to do their job. They are not performing "company work" by waiting for their personal bags to be checked.
You can argue all you want about how the company requires the search of personal bags and therefore it is job related and work. But don't you think that lawyers for employees suing for this and unions have already argue this all they way up to the Supreme Court? If you think you know something more than these lawyers and unions do, you better let them know. They've been losing cases like this since 1947.
Time involved means the time required to do the search. If Apple or any other employer requires an activity from an employee, the employee should be compensated for that activity and any waiting time the employer is responsible for.
Not according to the Supreme Court since passing of the 1947 Portal to Portal Act.
The key is that Apple did not ask nor required the employee to bring his/her personal bag to work. Therefore the inspection of said bag is not job related and covered under FLSA. In other words, the employee was not required to bring the bag to work therefore Apple is not required to pay the employee for the time it takes to search that bag.
How the F checking people's personal items (bags) is "company work"? Company never requires people to bring bags to work. Let's put it this way: I place 300 packages in my bag to works and it take security 30 min to check all items and I should get paid? Company never asks me to bring my personal belongings to work.
There you are again making a fool of yourself and having your issues understanding English. "Let's put it this way:" No one seems to care about your opinion. You speak down to people. You're disrespectful without cause. You have no idea what tolerance or the exchange of ideas and opinions are unless it is accompanied by your arrogance and out of control ego.
That was pretty simple. I hope you can understand the message.
They check your pockets too. And to the previous poster who took issue with my statement, let's be clear. I don't have a problem with searches...only with carrying them out in the store in front of customers...some of whom I may have just taught.
There you are again making a fool of yourself and having your issues understanding English. "Let's put it this way:" No one seems to care about your opinion. You speak down to people. You're disrespectful without cause. You have no idea what tolerance or the exchange of ideas and opinions are unless it is accompanied by your arrogance and out of control ego.
That was pretty simple. I hope you can understand the message.
No need to understand the ridiculously dumb comments like yours. Case closed.
How the F checking people's personal items (bags) is "company work"? Company never requires people to bring bags to work. Let's put it this way: I place 300 packages in my bag to works and it take security 30 min to check all items and I should get paid? Company never asks me to bring my personal belongings to work.
Company has no right to root through your personal belongings without due cause. And if they're going to make it a requirement of employment then they should pay for the time as part of your employed time - Supreme Court can do one; bad decision.
Disappointing that Apple is doing this and not compensating employees. They may not have to under the law, but they still should.
Company has no right to root through your personal belongings without due cause. And if they're going to make it a requirement of employment then they should pay for the time as part of your employed time - Supreme Court can do one; bad decision.
Disappointing that Apple is doing this and not compensating employees. They may not have to under the law, but they still should.
Tell that to the airlines the next time you fly on one of their planes. And the government will ground any airlines, that refuses to do such a search.
Had to go to jury duty selection several months ago and guess what I had to do before I entered the court house building, at 8:30 in the morning? I had to wait in a line with about 30 other people (most of them employees getting to work judging by their employee badges.) as everyone entering had to empty their pockets, remove any metal jewelry, metal belts buckles, metal eyeglasses and such, put them into a tray and on to a conveyor belt, along with any backpack, purse or briefcase so it can be X-rayed. Then after this, I had to walk through a metal detector and if it goes off, a guard takes a wand and will scan you for the reason it went off. All the court house employees, (except gun carrying law officers and Judges) have to go through this screening when getting to work and coming back from lunch.
Are these searches without due cause? Of course not. Even if 99.99% of the people flying on an airline or people entering a court house have no intention of smuggling anything in to harm anyone, if the search helps prevent the other .01 % of the people that might (and we know they're out there.), then the search is with due cause. It only takes 1 person with a bomb or gun to inflict massive harm.
In retail, it has been shown over and over again that employees theft is a major cause of inventory shrinkage. That is a fact that can not be disputed. So even if 99% of the employees would never steal from the company, if the search helps prevent the other 1% from stealing, then the search is done with due cause. It only takes a few dishonest employees (and we know they exist) to inflict a significant shrinkage in company's inventory.
So your comment of "without due cause" is without due cause.
Comments
The company is requiring it so it should be done on company time and not the employees' time. The person checking the bags is in fact doing 'company work' and getting paid to do so then the checkee should be compensated as well.
It's not that they don't like being searched, they don't like being searched on their time.
The company is requiring it so it should be done on company time and not the employees' time. The person checking the bags is in fact doing 'company work' and getting paid to do so then the checkee should be compensated as well.
Seriously? So the security guard should get paid for doing nothing all day while the Apple store employees are tending customers?
It's not that they don't like being searched, they don't like being searched on their time.
I'm sorry what part of the original article did you not understand??
According to court documents unsealed on Wednesday, Apple CEO Tim Cook received personal emails from Apple Store employees regarding bag check policies instituted for security purposes, calling the searches "embarrassing," "demeaning" and "disturbing."
The company is requiring it so it should be done on company time and not the employees' time. The person checking the bags is in fact doing 'company work' and getting paid to do so then the checkee should be compensated as well.
Nope, the person doing the checking is being paid because it in his job description. But no where in the checkee job description does it say that he/she will be paid for the time it takes to check a bag that wasn't necessary for the job. If you don't need the bag, don't bring one into the workplace. If you must, then consider yourself lucky that Apple let you do so. Apple could set up a policy that ban all bags bigger than a certain size from entering the workplace. Unless it contains items needed for the job or related to a disability. Whereby it would be checked while on the clock.
……...
IMO, it's incumbent upon the employer to make the bag check quick. If it takes a minute or two, fine. But once it starts getting up to 15 minutes, that's 75 to 90 minutes a week. That's 59 to 70 hours a year, based on someone who works 47 weeks. Why should an employee have to eat that?
That's an exaggeration by sue happy lawyers. It may take 15 minutes if you're at the end of the line on days that there are a lot of bags to be checked. But are you at the end of the line everyday of the week for a year. If you're in front of the line it may take less than a minute and maybe 5 minutes if you're in the middle of the line. On days you don't bring a bag, there may be no wait at all. And some days there are less bags to be checked so the wait is less than 10 minute from the end of the line. So if you average it out, it might only be 35 minutes a week and 27 hours a year.
To put that in perspective, if it takes a person working on the 20th floor of a office building 5 minutes for the elevator bring him/her down to the lobby, that's also 27 hours a year of non paid time that he/she is required to do while at work. And that don't include the 27hours of non paid time it took to take an elevator to the 20th floor when arriving at work.
But let's not forget about the 5 minutes it took to get from the time clock (after punching out.) to the locker room to retrieve your bag (and maybe another 5 minutes to change out of your uniform). And the 5 minutes it took to get to your car in the company's parking lot. And another 5 minutes to drive out of the lot. All these 5 minutes task leads to a hell of a lot of non paid time over a year while at your job. So that average of 5 minutes a day you need to wait for a bag search, because you brought a bag that wasn't necessary for your job into your workplace, is not going to matter as much as you make it seem.
Again though, bag searches are required to be on the clock for us!
Time involved means the time required to do the search. If Apple or any other employer requires an activity from an employee, the employee should be compensated for that activity and any waiting time the employer is responsible for.
I will leave the personal waste ejection activities for you to concern yourself with. But yes, I'm sure there are people who malinger or evade their work responsibilities by doing as you suggest. In my business, anyone who developed such habits would be forced to medically justify them and then seek treatment or be terminated. Medical conditions that prevent a worker from fulfilling their job responsibilities are legally permissible grounds for termination just as being a screw up is. But we are most likely to already know they are not the kind of employee our organization values. We compensate well, have a very good work environment and take good care of our employees and we expect them to fulfill their obligations as we do ours. If they don't they are out.Our business is 17 years old. More than half our work force has been with us 10 or more years.
Does that help your snarky comment and clear up where I stand for you?
Where did you get that from?
He made it up.
I feel like a lot of people are generalizing this so I thought I would speak up. I worked for Apple Retail for many years. They required you to clock out and then come find one of the Managers who had to take 3-5 minutes searching your bag and comparing serial numbers on you're Apple devices to a card that was filled out at a previous date. Sometimes there would only be one manager on duty. When this happened and they were engaged with an upset customer or in the office with the door locked for any number of reasons then you had to wait. This could add 10-45 minutes as I'd personally experienced.
At the end of the day, if I am required to check out with them to keep my job then that is a work requirement and should be on the clock. As soon as I clock out I should be on my time and should be able to leave immediately if I desire. If they were paying you to wait I bet you there would be more incentive for them to get you out of there in a timely fashion! :P
The company is requiring it so it should be done on company time and not the employees' time. The person checking the bags is in fact doing 'company work' and getting paid to do so then the checkee should be compensated as well.
How the F checking people's personal items (bags) is "company work"? Company never requires people to bring bags to work. Let's put it this way: I place 300 packages in my bag to works and it take security 30 min to check all items and I should get paid? Company never asks me to bring my personal belongings to work.
So the person checking the bags isn't doing company work?
So the person checking the bags isn't doing company work?
He means "company work" as it pertain to the people waiting to get their bag checked. The person checking the bags is performing "company work" because it's what he was hired to do and in his job description. That's why the Supreme Court has already ruled, numerous times, that companies don't have to pay their employees for the time it takes to check personal bags that are not required to do their job. They are not performing "company work" by waiting for their personal bags to be checked.
You can argue all you want about how the company requires the search of personal bags and therefore it is job related and work. But don't you think that lawyers for employees suing for this and unions have already argue this all they way up to the Supreme Court? If you think you know something more than these lawyers and unions do, you better let them know. They've been losing cases like this since 1947.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/10/business/supreme-court-rules-against-worker-pay-for-security-screenings.html?_r=0
Time involved means the time required to do the search. If Apple or any other employer requires an activity from an employee, the employee should be compensated for that activity and any waiting time the employer is responsible for.
Not according to the Supreme Court since passing of the 1947 Portal to Portal Act.
The key is that Apple did not ask nor required the employee to bring his/her personal bag to work. Therefore the inspection of said bag is not job related and covered under FLSA. In other words, the employee was not required to bring the bag to work therefore Apple is not required to pay the employee for the time it takes to search that bag.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/10/business/supreme-court-rules-against-worker-pay-for-security-screenings.html?_r=0
http://us.practicallaw.com/6-508-0673
How the F checking people's personal items (bags) is "company work"? Company never requires people to bring bags to work. Let's put it this way: I place 300 packages in my bag to works and it take security 30 min to check all items and I should get paid? Company never asks me to bring my personal belongings to work.
There you are again making a fool of yourself and having your issues understanding English. "Let's put it this way:" No one seems to care about your opinion. You speak down to people. You're disrespectful without cause. You have no idea what tolerance or the exchange of ideas and opinions are unless it is accompanied by your arrogance and out of control ego.
That was pretty simple. I hope you can understand the message.
They check your pockets too. And to the previous poster who took issue with my statement, let's be clear. I don't have a problem with searches...only with carrying them out in the store in front of customers...some of whom I may have just taught.
There you are again making a fool of yourself and having your issues understanding English. "Let's put it this way:" No one seems to care about your opinion. You speak down to people. You're disrespectful without cause. You have no idea what tolerance or the exchange of ideas and opinions are unless it is accompanied by your arrogance and out of control ego.
That was pretty simple. I hope you can understand the message.
No need to understand the ridiculously dumb comments like yours. Case closed.
Disappointing that Apple is doing this and not compensating employees. They may not have to under the law, but they still should.
Company has no right to root through your personal belongings without due cause. And if they're going to make it a requirement of employment then they should pay for the time as part of your employed time - Supreme Court can do one; bad decision.
Disappointing that Apple is doing this and not compensating employees. They may not have to under the law, but they still should.
Tell that to the airlines the next time you fly on one of their planes. And the government will ground any airlines, that refuses to do such a search.
Had to go to jury duty selection several months ago and guess what I had to do before I entered the court house building, at 8:30 in the morning? I had to wait in a line with about 30 other people (most of them employees getting to work judging by their employee badges.) as everyone entering had to empty their pockets, remove any metal jewelry, metal belts buckles, metal eyeglasses and such, put them into a tray and on to a conveyor belt, along with any backpack, purse or briefcase so it can be X-rayed. Then after this, I had to walk through a metal detector and if it goes off, a guard takes a wand and will scan you for the reason it went off. All the court house employees, (except gun carrying law officers and Judges) have to go through this screening when getting to work and coming back from lunch.
Are these searches without due cause? Of course not. Even if 99.99% of the people flying on an airline or people entering a court house have no intention of smuggling anything in to harm anyone, if the search helps prevent the other .01 % of the people that might (and we know they're out there.), then the search is with due cause. It only takes 1 person with a bomb or gun to inflict massive harm.
In retail, it has been shown over and over again that employees theft is a major cause of inventory shrinkage. That is a fact that can not be disputed. So even if 99% of the employees would never steal from the company, if the search helps prevent the other 1% from stealing, then the search is done with due cause. It only takes a few dishonest employees (and we know they exist) to inflict a significant shrinkage in company's inventory.
So your comment of "without due cause" is without due cause.