LOS ANGELES — A federal court judge recently denied Apple’s request to throw out two overtime lawsuits centered on its “mandatory” after hours bag check policy. A California federal court judge said there were too many factual questions related to the security screening policy and process to dismiss the cases. According to the judge, there is no clear interpretation of when the security screening must occur or if the screenings were even mandatory. Both putative class actions may go forward with their California State claims. However, in the same court ruling, the judge stayed Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) claims in both cases until the Supreme Court issues its ruling on the Amazon lawsuit regarding its policy requiring off-the-clock bag checks for its warehouse employees.
The Apple Argument
Between July and August 2013, four Apple employees filed separate lawsuits against Apple claiming the company required employees to clock out prior to undergoing a mandatory bag check before meal breaks and at the end of their shifts. These security screenings allegedly added an additional 90 minutes to the employees’ work week. The lawsuits were later consolidated into two class actions and a fifth lawsuit with the same allegations has been filed.
In Apple’s request to terminate the lawsuits, the company claimed the bag checks were voluntary. Employees who brought bags to work did not have the option to not undergo the search, but employees did have the option to not bring bags to work in the first place. Additionally, if an employee did not bring an Apple device into the store, they were not subject to the security screening. If employees could avoid the off-the-clock searches, Apple argues, they are not mandatory and the employees should not be paid for the time spent waiting for and during the security searches.
Court Stays
If the court issues a stay, it essentially puts the matter on hold until a certain event occurs. In many cases, a judge will issue a stay if the issue at hand is likely to be appealed quickly or if the same or similar issue is being decided by the Supreme Court. Stays are intended to save time and expense in court and reduce the cost or damage of carrying out a court order that could potentially be reversed on appeal.
If the Supreme Court rules in the Amazon claim that time spent in off-the-clock required security screenings is work related and compensable, then that ruling will apply to other off-the-clock security screening cases. Because lawsuits frequently have many components, it is possible to stay a portion of a lawsuit, like the FLSA claims against Apple, while continuing with others, like the state wage claims.
If you believe your employer has denied you proper overtime wages through practices like off-the-clock screenings or other off-the-clock work, our knowledgeable overtime pay lawyers can be of assistance. Contact our top rated team of overtime pay lawyers today at (855) 754-2795 or complete the Free Unpaid Overtime Case Review form and our experienced legal team will evaluate your case. If we accept your case, we will represent you under our No Fee Promise. This means there are no legal fees or costs unless you receive a settlement.