Court rules Apple must pay California workers during bag checks




California
California's Supreme Court called out Apple for hypocrisy in its characterization of the iPhone as unnecessary for its own employees  

Los Angeles (AFP) - The California Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that Apple must pay employees for time spent waiting for their bags and personal electronic devices to be searched when they leave work.

The decision means that the tech giant will have to pay millions of dollars to more than 12,000 hourly workers at California retail stores who fall under the mandatory bag-search policy.

According to court documents, Apple employees are required to clock out before submitting to an exit search which can take from five to 20 minutes.

On the busiest days, employees say the wait time can be as long as 45 minutes. Those who refuse to have their belongings searched are subject to discipline, including termination.

A lower court had previously sided with Apple, ruling that time spent by employees waiting for the exit searches cannot be considered "hours worked" under California law.

The plaintiffs escalated the case to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals which asked the Supreme Court to address the state law issue.

The state's high court in its decision issued on Thursday rejected Apple's argument that its employees could easily avoid a search by choosing not to bring a bag or iPhone to work.

Quoting from a US Supreme Court decision, it noted that cell phones are "now such a pervasive and insistent part of daily life that the proverbial visitor from Mars might conclude they were an important feature of human anatomy."

"The irony and inconsistency of Apple's argument must be noted," the court added.

"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."

Apple representatives could not immediately be reached for comment on the ruling.

The Apple case is the third the state high court has considered in recent years as related to minimum wage and time during which workers are under employers' control.

In 2018, the court ruled that Starbucks has to pay for off-the-clock work -- such as going through the checklist for closing the store -- that can last a few seconds or minutes past someone's shift.

COMMENTS

More Related News

Wisconsin Voters Defy Stay-at-Home Orders With Polls Open
Wisconsin Voters Defy Stay-at-Home Orders With Polls Open

(Bloomberg) -- Wisconsin voters defied stay-at-home orders and waited for hours to cast ballots in the first state to hold an in-person election since the coronavirus pandemic shut down most public spaces.Although at least a dozen states have delayed primaries or switched to vote-by-mail since the outbreak, similar attempts by Wisconsin's Democratic governor, Tony Evers, were stymied by Republican opposition and rulings from the conservative majorities on the state and U.S. Supreme Courts.Democratic front-runner Joe Biden and rival Bernie Sanders were at the top of the ticket with 87 delegates at stake in the presidential primary fight. Biden, who has a near-insurmountable lead over...

Political hackery at its worst: Supreme Court gives Wisconsin a green light to disenfranchise voters during the pandemic
Political hackery at its worst: Supreme Court gives Wisconsin a green light to disenfranchise voters during the pandemic

The court disenfranchises voters who are rightly afraid to vote in person because of the coronavirus pandemic.

Editorial: The U.S. Supreme Court just made it easier for police to pull you over
Editorial: The U.S. Supreme Court just made it easier for police to pull you over
  • US
  • 2020-04-06 23:16:18Z

The justices give police the OK to stop drivers with nothing more than the barest fig leaf of a reason: that the car owner's license has been revoked.

'OK, boomer!' Supreme Court hands partial victory to federal worker claiming age discrimination

The case won attention at oral argument when Chief Justice John Roberts asked whether the phrase "OK, boomer" would qualify as age discrimination.

Supreme Court rejects church challenge to ban on bus ads
Supreme Court rejects church challenge to ban on bus ads

The Supreme Court on Monday rejected an appeal from a Catholic church in Washington, D.C., that sought to place religious-themed ads on public buses. The justices are leaving in place a federal appeals court ruling that found no fault with the Washington transit agency policy that banned all issue-oriented advertisements on the region's rail and bus system. The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Washington sought to place an ad on the outside of public buses in the fall of 2017.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked with *

Cancel reply

Comments

Top News: Latin America