High court to hear another far-reaching wage case

Former workers at Amazon warehouses, who were required to clear airport-like screening when they left work each day, want to be paid for the time they spent standing in the security lines.

The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday will hear arguments as to whether that anti-theft screening time — ranging from a few minutes to as long as 25 minutes a day, according to complaints — is compensable under federal wage and hour law.

A group of lawsuits, filed by Amazon warehouse workers around the country who seek back pay for their unpaid time in lines, are on hold until the nation’s highest court issues its first opinion on whether security screening time counts as paid work time.

The case, Integrity Staffing Solutions v. Jesse Busk et al, follows other cases that have sought to clarify when employers must pay for time workers spend at work.

Some, dubbed “donning and doffing” cases, have decided when employers must, or don’t have to, pay for time employees spend putting on or taking off required work clothing or safety equipment.

Other cases have zeroed in on whether workers must be paid for time they spend getting equipment ready for the job, for taking required showers, or for walking to or from their duty stations.

Amazon warehouse workers are required to pass through security checks to make sure they’re not stealing anything from the warehouses when their shifts end. The former workers, led by Busk as the lead name on the case, argue they should be paid for that time.

“We have a longstanding practice of not commenting on pending litigation, but data shows that employees walk through post-shift security screening with little or no wait,” said Kelly Cheeseman, a spokeswoman in the Amazon corporate communications department.

Experts value the case at more than $100 million if Amazon and its staffing agencies are required to pay back wages to as many as 400,000 workers.

Related compensation cases are ongoing with CVS, J.C. Penney, Apple, Ross Stores and TJX companies.

The case before the Supreme Court was brought by two former employees of Integrity Staffing Solutions, a temporary help agency that provides many Amazon warehouse workers. Temporary workers and warehouse workers directly employed by Amazon are all required to clear security each day when they leave.

Companies involved in this and similar cases argue that standing in the security lines isn’t “integral and indispensible” to the job and thus isn’t compensable under the law.

The workers and their advocates argue that they’re hostage to “off-the-clock” work demands until they clear the lines, and the least the employer could do is hire more security inspectors or use more screening machines.

A key point in this case is that time spent in end-of-shift security screening is for the employer’s benefit — to stop possible thefts — and not an employee-benefit or shared-benefit reason, such as showering to remove harmful chemicals from the work site.

This story was originally published October 6, 2014 at 2:00 PM with the headline "High court to hear another far-reaching wage case."