The Supreme Court Says Unanimously Your Boss Can Make You Work For Free

originally posted by: MountainLaurel
One of the first training classes I was sent to made it very clear that your employees are NOT your friends and you should cease to socialize with anyone that you over see at work.

As someone who is in sales management I completely agree that you should not be fraternizing with your direct reports after work hours. You need to be able to objectively assess each one, if and when the time comes, and to reward to punish those who over-perform or under-perform. It is what is most fair to your team.

An occasional team dinner or the like is acceptable be regular social encounters will prevent you from being a responsible manager and invite the accusations of impropriety.

originally posted by: akushla99

'Work related doesn't automatically entitle you to money'...except if you drive a company car - in which case you are in a position to claim it under a package...These people are smart enough to understand tax breaks...

A company car is not a 'tax break', you are required by the Internal Revenue Service to log all mileage recorded on a company car's odometer and break out what was used for work and what was not. Driving to and from your house to either your office or your first/last appointment is considered taxable mileage as it is personal usage.

originally posted by: VforVendettea
a reply to: MountainLaurel

Yeah,
I want to be paid for all the time I spend waiting in line.
Think how much I would make for spending a day at the DMV!

There is nothing keeping them from reading a book while standing in line.

screw that...if i'm an honest person working there I would be pissed and rightly so....the companies profits increase if they can catch thieves, and the inventory costs go down, this is certainly a viable part of the work day for the company. by detaining, and holding me in a line, their business becomes more profitable, so I should get paid....tell you what.....why not make it that everyone that ends their work shift, end 15 minutes early, that give the employees 15 minutes on company time, to go through this line...no overtime, and it would make sense to the employees.
and the comparison to the DMV???.,...those dots your trying to connect, are simply too far apart.

Perhaps not...but 88.400 employees multiplied by approx 90 secs a day, over a year represents a sizable saving in dinaro...someone's paying to wait.

Cheers

Å99

a reply to: Aazadan

Contracts only have merit when both sides have negotiating power. No warehouse employee has the ability to negotiate the searches or time spent waiting for them out of their contract.

Contracts have merit when you agree to them.

I think some people here, need to go back and research some of the early 20 century labor movements....companies hiring thugs with baseball bats to come out and crack skulls of strikers, people being shot, riots, fires set...workers putting up with all of that just to get a decent wage, or work protections....companies and corporations are always looking to find ways to screw their employees out of wages and benefits, or reduce safety while you work......even tech companies these days are squeezing more hours for less pay, while providing gimics to keep you working there. they always will want more for less...the sooner young workers get organized and form a union, the better. slowly over time you too will be squeezed, no matter who you work for.

While I don't agree with their methods and not paying their employees for the time they are being searched, it got me to thinking. They are searching people to make sure they are not stealing merchandise, but you know the need to search employees probably arose from employees stealing merchandise. It isn't just as though a company would just assume everyone is a thief and search them all unless it had actually been a problem prior.

So perhaps they have a big problem with their employees stealing their stuff? It's easy to just sympathize with the people not getting paid because they have to stand in line to be searched, but seriously.. why the hell would the company even feel the need to do this if it were not a problem to begin with? Maybe they should hire higher quality people that they can trust not to steal their stuff. Or maybe pay them more so they don't feel the need to steal.

a reply to: MaMaa

people will always steal stuff man.
i work in a foundry and there are cameras anywhere....
you know what sand blasting is right? ok
we have a blaster at work but it does not use sand, it uses metal. its called 'shot'. the size of a bb.
all castings get blasted. then from they blaster they go to cleanup or inspection. there are crevices and channels in the castings that collect the shot.
youre supposed to vacuum it out and then dump it back into the blaster. we are talking a LOT of weight.
people would vacuum it out and put it in their lunch box, their pockets, their thermos, etc...

save it up for so long and then scrap it.
people will steel anything that is not nailed down, and even then, they will figure out a way.

The waiting thing is pretty simple in my mind. It's in the contract and it happens on work property. It should be paid for.

originally posted by: projectvxn
Contracts have merit when you agree to them.

So if Amazon's contract said that each employee had to sign their first born over to them, it would be completely fine because the employee agreed to the contract?

a reply to: MountainLaurel

Some in here suggest that workers that disagree with the conditions of their job simply need to find a new job. Now, that sounds plausible, doesn't it? "Oh, you don't like it here, so bugger off and find a new job." And it is what many employers will say, literally.

But employers have plenty of resources. They can hire a new employee any time. Most companies even have a department to do that for them, or they engage a bureau. They don't risk anything by firing you. Even in the exceptional situation that you have a unique set of skills and they need that set of skills - they will do their utmost to ensure that your job can be done by faceless minions - and then fire you still. It's cheaper.

On the other hand the employed only have limited resources: they can't stop payments on their houses, cars and can't stop providing for their families so they need the darned job. And because they do they are forced to drive to work for an hour, then work for eight hours, stand in line to be searched for another 25 minutes and then drive back an hour. If they leave home at 7.00 in the morning, they can count themselves lucky when they arrive at home in time for supper. Now, tell me, when are they going to sollicit a new job - even if they can find a job that matches their skills, within reach of their homes and which pays equivalent or better? Sure, they can write letters in the evening. But even if they find a job - they will have to take a leave for the interview. You can only do that if your employer allows you to take a day off. Which he may or may not allow..

Sure enough, if your job is menacing enough you will do anything to get another job, even move if need be. But there are a lot of totally unjust things an employer can do to his employed - and sometimes does - without the risk of not being able to do his business anymore.

That's one of the main reasons I feel any business should be owned by all that work there. Profit should be equally spread, as should be responsibility. If menacing decisions need to be made, it will be by majority vote and at least all will profit from it.

But that's not (yet) how business is done. And as long as we have folks that think they are 'entitled' to huge profits because other folks do their work, that won't change.

So, please stop saying "but if he does not like it let him bugger off and find a new job". He can't most of the time.

originally posted by: Grovit
a reply to: MountainLaurel

i love the argument about how places dont pay well. places like walmart
well, they dont really. it is equal to skill level i think

i also think that money management is very important, especially if you dont make much.

i was at wal mart a couple days ago and the cashier started telling us about her 4 cats. then she told us she just paid $800 for a main coon kitten.
hahahahahaha

broke and dont make #, but can afford almost a grand for a cat.

How do you know she's broke, did she tell you? Or do you assume it just because she works a shop till? How do you know she doesn't work two or three jobs and has a bit of cash in the bank?

a reply to: MaMaa

So, in the USA it's allright to assume that somebody is guility until proven innocent as long as you pay him a salary??

We all know most of the shoplifting is done by customers. But I haven't heard about forcing customers to stand in line to be searched.. why not then? If it's allright to scoff your workers and assume they are stinkin' thieves, why not do the same for your customers?

Might the simple fact that employers feel superiour to their workers have something to do with it? "We pay the buggers, so we can order them around or else we will fire them"... right? Surely I'm mistaken...

originally posted by: Grovit
a reply to: MaMaa
people will always steal stuff man.

Sir, please speak for yourself.

i am sorry but what a bunch of pompous jackasses let them show up and sit on their cushioned thrones for free and lets see how fast they change their decision. Amazon makes their employees spend almost a half hour waiting in line to make sure they haven't stole anything . wow that must really make the employees have high morale. i am glad i havent bought anything from them in like 5 years

a reply to: ForteanOrg

We all know most of the shoplifting is done by customers.

Are you sure?

U.S. retailers stand to lose an average of 1.3% of sales through shrink, translating to $54 billion per year. Employee inventory theft is the largest area of retail loss today, accounting for 37% of total shrink.

www.retailtouchpoints.com...

But I haven't heard about forcing customers to stand in line to be searched.. why not then?

Have you ever seen those sensors at the door as you're leaving a store?
www.securitytagstore.com...

a reply to: projectvxn

Fair enough, BUT then they should have more LPO's on at the end of the shift so they can get them out in a fair time.
The ruling should be more inclusive and reasonable and perhaps split 10 minutes on the employee the rest that's on the employeer obligation, don't get it done in 10, start to pay.

a reply to: Blue_Jay33

"The allegations in this case were simply not true -- data shows that employees typically walk through security with little or no wait, and Amazon has a global process that ensures the time employees spend waiting in security is less than 90 seconds," an Amazon spokeswoman said in a statement following the ruling.

www.cnet.com...

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: ForteanOrg

We all know most of the shoplifting is done by customers.

Are you sure?

U.S. retailers stand to lose an average of 1.3% of sales through shrink, translating to $54 billion per year. Employee inventory theft is the largest area of retail loss today, accounting for 37% of total shrink.

www.retailtouchpoints.com...

But I haven't heard about forcing customers to stand in line to be searched.. why not then?

Have you ever seen those sensors at the door as you're leaving a store?
www.securitytagstore.com...

Ya...we never hear of customers complaining of waiting in a line...sensors at amazon for staff?...seems like the most intelligent solution...but that would cost money, rather offset that layout, by lining thieving staff up after a shift and search them.
With all the security issues we've all had to get used to, the best solution amazon can come up with, doesn't involve modern inventory control mechanisms that have clearly worked to stop box cutters and small bottles of suspect liquid through airports...but can't be used to expediently discharge the whole shift bloc of thier own suspected staff...I find that, ridiculous...I don't know about anyone else.

Å99

a reply to: ForteanOrg

im certainly not speaking for you.....sir
i mean people in general and i am correct
employee theft is a huge issue damn near everywhere...

you think all those cameras in every retail outlet across the world are for watching the customers only?
you think those bank cameras are for watching the customers and not the tellers?
get real
and dobydoll, i dont know. just taking a stab.
you know how the threads go...people that work at wal mart barely have enough to pay rent. they dont make a living wage...blah blah.

pretty sure i said maybe she is rich and just works cause she is bored.
anything is possible but i will go by my theory of money management being as much of an issue as wages.

a reply to: akushla99

Ya...we never hear of customers complaining of waiting in a line...sensors at amazon for staff?...seems like the most intelligent solution...but that would cost money, rather offset that layout, by lining thieving staff up after a shift and search them.

You think the employees are being hand searched?

They say workers at the Amazon plants take up to 25 minutes to wait in line to pass through metal detectors, a statement which Amazon countered.

www.techtimes.com...