It's part of your commute, like a stop light at the end of the street exiting the mall parking lot. The fact these workers came back their second day on the job verifies that they accepted the length of time it takes to get from their homes to their workstation within the Apple Store, and vice versa Or maybe I'm from an older generation where people didn't cry about such minor crap.
Absolutely. You accepted the terms connected to the job when you started working for them.
No contract can reasonably foresee every contingency. If that were the case, there would be very few lawsuits brought, and even in those that ended up in courts, the defendant would win a vast majority of the time.
Sorry but no. If an employer requires its hourly workers to do anything, they pay. Lawyers and graphic designers don’t give away free time to clients (even short phone calls): they bill it. Why should retail workers be expected to give employers free clock time?
They shouldn’t. To say otherwise is being irrational in the name of brand loyalty, rugged individualism and bootstrapping, yada yada. Part of Americans’ odd infatuation with corporate masters and business over people. (“Corporations are people, my friend.” -Mitt Romney)
Agree completely, we are also talking about the least paid employees at the richest company in the world, Apple's management should be ashamed. I swear some people who post here daily would sell their mother's soul if it helped Apple sell a million more iPhones.
The lawsuit should be open and shut for the employees.
I've never worked anywhere where the employees only option to keep from getting searched was don't bring stuff. Asinine in the extreme.
Items for lunch, medications, for women menstrual products, and all manner of items needed for before and after work. Apple already has to deal with boots, umbrellas, coats, sweaters, bathroom breaks, change of attire (employees wear uniforms).
I'll take it back. I did work for one employer that had some restrictions -- the Navy -- when I was working with some classified material -- and then we used secured lockers.
Apple, like everyone else, needs to protect against employee theft (is there any other issue involved here?). I assume Apple security protects against customer theft, and don't require customers not to bring personal items into the store. Little imagination is required add protection against employee theft that is not unreasonable.
It's part of your commute, like a stop light at the end of the street exiting the mall parking lot. The fact these workers came back their second day on the job verifies that they accepted the length of time it takes to get from their homes to their workstation within the Apple Store, and vice versa Or maybe I'm from an older generation where people didn't cry about such minor crap.
I don't know how old you are but as I'm 64 I have a lot of 'life experieces' over the years. I was talking this over with someone of about the same age as me earlier today. For most things that came and hit us, we just shook ourselves off, shrugged our shoulders and got on with life. Were we exploited? I don't know. I'm not the right person to ask but I do know that taking legal action was and still is not on our radar.
IMHO and IANAL etc but the US Legal system could be the downfall of the country. Everything anyone wants to do and no matter how good and beneficial is might be to the human race, someone will inevitably sue to stop it or slow it down etc etc Are we in danger of becoming the 'cotton wool' generation what no one does anything without first testing it in at least 4 different courts of law. You tell me eh? But I am pretty sure that man would not have set foot on the moon (conspiracy theories not withstanding) if NASA started the programme today.
When I worked in Apple Retail I never saw bag checks, per se. At first we had tech checks. If you owned an Apple device, and it only applied to Apple devices, you planned to bring into the store you were given a "Tech Card" where you could list serial numbers of your devices and had that card verified and signed by a manager. Then, when leaving the store you would present the card and your device/s to the manager who would verify everything matched and then be on your way.
I only ever brought my iPhone in so when I was exiting the store I had my Tech Card out and my iPhone open to Settings with the serial number on screen. It slowed me down by literally seconds. Yes, I was already off the clock but it made almost no difference. Occasionally, the Leader on the Floor wouldn't be on the floor and I'd have to track them down to get the Tech Check. That was minor lay annoying but, whatever, I knew it was my choice to use an iPhone and bring it to work.
But some people I worked with would bring in a backpack with their iPad and MacBook Pro plus have their iPhone in their pocket. I could never understand what was so important that you needed to bring all those device to work, frequently on a daily basis (not to mentione we had plenty of computers we could use while on break, lunch, etc).
I would say it was about 3 years ago that our Store Leader stopped the practice and Tech Checks were no more. I can't speak to how it was at other stores but at the 2 I worked in I never saw it again.
My view is that this lawsuit is mostly silliness. We all knew full well that if we brought our devices we had to show them on the way out. As I mentioned earlier, it took just seconds to have my iPhone checked. If someone was delayed longer because they had brought more stuff, too bad for them.
If the bag checks are truly taking 20 minutes then the employees should be compensated. But I suspect that the checks take less than 30 seconds. I just cannot fathom how anyone can come up with the 20 minute figure without exaggerating way beyond the realm of reality, unless of course the person responsible for the check is busy serving paying customers, at which point each incident should be handled on a case by case basis and the extra cost to Apple chalked up to improving customer experience. Personally I think the people who brought the complaint against Apple are small minded and selfish, but what else is new?
If the bag checks are truly taking 20 minutes then the employees should be compensated. But I suspect that the checks take less than 30 seconds. I just cannot fathom how anyone can come up with the 20 minute figure without exaggerating way beyond the realm of reality, unless of course the person responsible for the check is busy serving paying customers, at which point each incident should be handled on a case by case basis and the extra cost to Apple chalked up to improving customer experience. Personally I think the people who brought the complaint against Apple are small minded and selfish, but what else is new?
Surely you understand how traffic congestion works. Now imagine there's a toll booth on that highway but all the tolls are closed thereby keeping all vehicles from passing because there's no manager to check each bag. Your rationale that there should never be any congestion at a toll booth because it only takes a few seconds to toss in some coins or less than 30 seconds for the attendee to make change simply doesn't work.
If the bag checks are truly taking 20 minutes then the employees should be compensated. But I suspect that the checks take less than 30 seconds. I just cannot fathom how anyone can come up with the 20 minute figure without exaggerating way beyond the realm of reality, unless of course the person responsible for the check is busy serving paying customers, at which point each incident should be handled on a case by case basis and the extra cost to Apple chalked up to improving customer experience. Personally I think the people who brought the complaint against Apple are small minded and selfish, but what else is new?
No they should not be compensated. There is no work being performed on the part of the employee. This is just part of working for a company that takes security seriously.
If the bag checks are truly taking 20 minutes then the employees should be compensated. But I suspect that the checks take less than 30 seconds. I just cannot fathom how anyone can come up with the 20 minute figure without exaggerating way beyond the realm of reality, unless of course the person responsible for the check is busy serving paying customers, at which point each incident should be handled on a case by case basis and the extra cost to Apple chalked up to improving customer experience. Personally I think the people who brought the complaint against Apple are small minded and selfish, but what else is new?
No they should not be compensated. There is no work being performed on the part of the employee. This is just part of working for a company that takes security seriously.
Until the CA Supreme Court makes a ruling on this all opinions are of equal validity. Calling these checks “security” is a misnomer. This is actually a matter of “loss prevention” enacted by Apple to prevent financial loss from employee theft or “inventory shrinkage” as it’s known to some retailers. Most if not all retailers spend significant amounts of money to prevent shrinkage/loss prevention, from closely tracking inventory movement, requiring supervisory intervention for overrides to most POS actions, putting electronic tracking tags on items, to camera and human based employee surveillance.
It’s a sad but financially a pragmatic reality because it’s acknowledging that implicit trust relationships between employers and employees only holds so much sway. Trust but verify. From a bottom line perspective, if Apple were to compensate employees for the ACTUAL time it takes to implement their loss prevention procedures that the company has put in place, even up to the bogus 20 minute claim, and only on an as-needed basis, the total bottom-line cost to Apple for its loss prevention program would probably still be a fraction of what other retailers spend to implement much more elaborate loss prevention procedures as an accepted cost to doing business. Yes, in an ideal world these costs to doing business would not exist. But when dealing with humans these procedures are an unfortunate necessity. Wish it were not so.
boltsfan17 said: The problem with that is there is no logic expecting to get paid for something you've chosen to do (bring bag to work).
By that 'logic' there is no logic in Apple allowing employees to bring something to work in the first place. And the reality is almost everybody brings something to work, every day. So it doesn't surprise me that the 'clock out so we can search you policy' has resulted in a lawsuit. I believe Apple will lose or cave, as they should.
It's not right and Apple should know better. Paraphrasing a previous poster, on the clock, I do what The Man Says (to a point, obviously). Off the clock, it's my time, not the Company Store's.
25min is 25min, whether a lump sum or spread throughout the day. I have no problem with someone taking a job that has poor working conditions and then doing something to correct them.
boltsfan17 said: The problem with that is there is no logic expecting to get paid for something you've chosen to do (bring bag to work).
By that 'logic' there is no logic in Apple allowing employees to bring something to work in the first place. And the reality is almost everybody brings something to work, every day. So it doesn't surprise me that the 'clock out so we can search you policy' has resulted in a lawsuit. I believe Apple will lose or cave, as they should.
It's not right and Apple should know better. Paraphrasing a previous poster, on the clock, I do what The Man Says (to a point, obviously). Off the clock, it's my time, not the Company Store's.
25min is 25min, whether a lump sum or spread throughout the day. I have no problem with someone taking a job that has poor working conditions and then doing something to correct them.
The employee isn't actually doing any work functions, so why would Apple pay for that? It's silly. It's part of working for a company who takes security seriously. So by your logic should someone who works for a company that deals with highly classified military equipment such as Lockheed Martin be paid going through security checks? Apple isn't going to lose this case. It shouldn't be in the courts to begin with. The Supreme Court already ruled against lawsuits like this. It's pretty much as close to a guarantee as you can get that this appeal will get thrown out in court.
The employee isn't actually doing any work functions, so why would Apple pay for that? It's silly. It's part of working for a company who takes security seriously. So by your logic should someone who works for a company that deals with highly classified military equipment such as Lockheed Martin be paid going through security checks? Apple isn't going to lose this case. It shouldn't be in the courts to begin with. The Supreme Court already ruled against lawsuits like this. It's pretty much as close to a guarantee as you can get that this appeal will get thrown out in court.
They're absolutely required to wait until a manager lets them go. That means it's on the company. If I'm told to be at a job site at a particular time and there's literally nothing for me to do for few minutes while I wait around for someone else to catch up I still charge for that time. The same goes when I'm ready to leave and need to wait for some reason.
The employee isn't actually doing any work functions, so why would Apple pay for that? It's silly. It's part of working for a company who takes security seriously. So by your logic should someone who works for a company that deals with highly classified military equipment such as Lockheed Martin be paid going through security checks? Apple isn't going to lose this case. It shouldn't be in the courts to begin with. The Supreme Court already ruled against lawsuits like this. It's pretty much as close to a guarantee as you can get that this appeal will get thrown out in court.
They're absolutely required to wait until a manager lets them go. That means it's on the company. If I'm told to be at a job site at a particular time and there's literally nothing for me to do for few minutes while I wait around for someone else to catch up I still charge for that time.
As do I. If the client is doing something else and not ready for me to begin work I still expect to be paid. Waiting becomes an opportunity cost if not.
The employee isn't actually doing any work functions, so why would Apple pay for that? It's silly. It's part of working for a company who takes security seriously. So by your logic should someone who works for a company that deals with highly classified military equipment such as Lockheed Martin be paid going through security checks? Apple isn't going to lose this case. It shouldn't be in the courts to begin with. The Supreme Court already ruled against lawsuits like this. It's pretty much as close to a guarantee as you can get that this appeal will get thrown out in court.
They're absolutely required to wait until a manager lets them go. That means it's on the company. If I'm told to be at a job site at a particular time and there's literally nothing for me to do for few minutes while I wait around for someone else to catch up I still charge for that time. The same goes when I'm ready to leave and need to wait for some reason.
It's not really required. If I brought no Apple devices to work I didn't need a tech check. In fact, I worked with a couple of guys who had Android phones and they didn't have to go through the tech check ever. My managers got used to me only bringing in my iPhone and if I had made a purchase at work that day they didn't check my Apple Store bag, just my iPhone's serial number.
Also, it was not a requirement to have the tech check performed by the LotF, but that was usually the easiest. It could be performed by another manager, just before the employee punched out, but that tends to be harder to do while also leaving in a timely manner. But it have LotF do the tech check usually meant one would have to clock out first.
This is the same way it works in clothing stores, if an employee is leaving the store with a bag a manager checks it first. It's very common in retail and nothing new.
Theft is fairly common, sometimes by employees. I don't understand why "bag checks" seem so inappropriate. As has been mentioned several times, "bag check"s at Apple Stores only applied if you decided you needed to bring an Apple device to work.
The employee isn't actually doing any work functions, so why would Apple pay for that? It's silly. It's part of working for a company who takes security seriously. So by your logic should someone who works for a company that deals with highly classified military equipment such as Lockheed Martin be paid going through security checks? Apple isn't going to lose this case. It shouldn't be in the courts to begin with. The Supreme Court already ruled against lawsuits like this. It's pretty much as close to a guarantee as you can get that this appeal will get thrown out in court.
They're absolutely required to wait until a manager lets them go. That means it's on the company. If I'm told to be at a job site at a particular time and there's literally nothing for me to do for few minutes while I wait around for someone else to catch up I still charge for that time. The same goes when I'm ready to leave and need to wait for some reason.
It's not really required.
Are you suggesting that in the 21st century in a metropolis that it should be commonplace for Apple Store workers to leave home all day and take the subway across town to work and back while doing other chores before and/or after work while their iPhone stays at home?
“It’s the Current Year!” isn’t really an argument.
…while their iPhone stays at home?
“What is a pocket” is also not an argument. Not in the 21st century, at least. Yes, in the 11th century. You also seem to be conflating his statement with another part of the discussion. He said that a bag (and therefore a bag check) is not necessary. Nowhere did he say it was necessary–or even the mainstream–not to carry personal possessions.
In the original threads on this nonsensical lawsuit, I don’t remember if the question ever came up of what OTHER high-security sites do in this situation. We could simply look to that for precedent. Yes, the US Mint weighs people going in and out. Yes, NORAD would likely check bags. Are the people there paid for that time?
The employee isn't actually doing any work functions, so why would Apple pay for that? It's silly. It's part of working for a company who takes security seriously. So by your logic should someone who works for a company that deals with highly classified military equipment such as Lockheed Martin be paid going through security checks? Apple isn't going to lose this case. It shouldn't be in the courts to begin with. The Supreme Court already ruled against lawsuits like this. It's pretty much as close to a guarantee as you can get that this appeal will get thrown out in court.
They're absolutely required to wait until a manager lets them go. That means it's on the company. If I'm told to be at a job site at a particular time and there's literally nothing for me to do for few minutes while I wait around for someone else to catch up I still charge for that time. The same goes when I'm ready to leave and need to wait for some reason.
It's not really required.
Are you suggesting that in the 21st century in a metropolis that it should be commonplace for Apple Store workers to leave home all day and take the subway across town to work and back while doing other chores before and/or after work while their iPhone stays at home?
Comments
This is well-accepted.
I've never worked anywhere where the employees only option to keep from getting searched was don't bring stuff. Asinine in the extreme.
Items for lunch, medications, for women menstrual products, and all manner of items needed for before and after work. Apple already has to deal with boots, umbrellas, coats, sweaters, bathroom breaks, change of attire (employees wear uniforms).
I'll take it back. I did work for one employer that had some restrictions -- the Navy -- when I was working with some classified material -- and then we used secured lockers.
Apple, like everyone else, needs to protect against employee theft (is there any other issue involved here?). I assume Apple security protects against customer theft, and don't require customers not to bring personal items into the store. Little imagination is required add protection against employee theft that is not unreasonable.
IMHO and IANAL etc but the US Legal system could be the downfall of the country. Everything anyone wants to do and no matter how good and beneficial is might be to the human race, someone will inevitably sue to stop it or slow it down etc etc
Are we in danger of becoming the 'cotton wool' generation what no one does anything without first testing it in at least 4 different courts of law.
You tell me eh? But I am pretty sure that man would not have set foot on the moon (conspiracy theories not withstanding) if NASA started the programme today.
I only ever brought my iPhone in so when I was exiting the store I had my Tech Card out and my iPhone open to Settings with the serial number on screen. It slowed me down by literally seconds. Yes, I was already off the clock but it made almost no difference. Occasionally, the Leader on the Floor wouldn't be on the floor and I'd have to track them down to get the Tech Check. That was minor lay annoying but, whatever, I knew it was my choice to use an iPhone and bring it to work.
But some people I worked with would bring in a backpack with their iPad and MacBook Pro plus have their iPhone in their pocket. I could never understand what was so important that you needed to bring all those device to work, frequently on a daily basis (not to mentione we had plenty of computers we could use while on break, lunch, etc).
I would say it was about 3 years ago that our Store Leader stopped the practice and Tech Checks were no more. I can't speak to how it was at other stores but at the 2 I worked in I never saw it again.
My view is that this lawsuit is mostly silliness. We all knew full well that if we brought our devices we had to show them on the way out. As I mentioned earlier, it took just seconds to have my iPhone checked. If someone was delayed longer because they had brought more stuff, too bad for them.
I think tjete here are two sides to the bag check issue:
1) you don't really need to bring your bag to work. Check it in a lot cost or secure it in your car or leave it at home.
2) any company that requires a worker to give or their time for any reason needs to compensate the employee for said time.
It’s a sad but financially a pragmatic reality because it’s acknowledging that implicit trust relationships between employers and employees only holds so much sway. Trust but verify. From a bottom line perspective, if Apple were to compensate employees for the ACTUAL time it takes to implement their loss prevention procedures that the company has put in place, even up to the bogus 20 minute claim, and only on an as-needed basis, the total bottom-line cost to Apple for its loss prevention program would probably still be a fraction of what other retailers spend to implement much more elaborate loss prevention procedures as an accepted cost to doing business. Yes, in an ideal world these costs to doing business would not exist. But when dealing with humans these procedures are an unfortunate necessity. Wish it were not so.
It's not right and Apple should know better. Paraphrasing a previous poster, on the clock, I do what The Man Says (to a point, obviously). Off the clock, it's my time, not the Company Store's.
25min is 25min, whether a lump sum or spread throughout the day. I have no problem with someone taking a job that has poor working conditions and then doing something to correct them.
Also, it was not a requirement to have the tech check performed by the LotF, but that was usually the easiest. It could be performed by another manager, just before the employee punched out, but that tends to be harder to do while also leaving in a timely manner. But it have LotF do the tech check usually meant one would have to clock out first.
This is the same way it works in clothing stores, if an employee is leaving the store with a bag a manager checks it first. It's very common in retail and nothing new.
Theft is fairly common, sometimes by employees. I don't understand why "bag checks" seem so inappropriate. As has been mentioned several times, "bag check"s at Apple Stores only applied if you decided you needed to bring an Apple device to work.
“What is a pocket” is also not an argument. Not in the 21st century, at least. Yes, in the 11th century. You also seem to be conflating his statement with another part of the discussion. He said that a bag (and therefore a bag check) is not necessary. Nowhere did he say it was necessary–or even the mainstream–not to carry personal possessions.
In the original threads on this nonsensical lawsuit, I don’t remember if the question ever came up of what OTHER high-security sites do in this situation. We could simply look to that for precedent. Yes, the US Mint weighs people going in and out. Yes, NORAD would likely check bags. Are the people there paid for that time?
Just visit any defense contractor at 5pm to find the answer.