Amazon workers get another chance at pay for security screening time

Nearly two years after the Second Circuit heard the case, the appeals court revived a class action from three Connecticut workers fighting for backpay.MANHATTAN (CN) — A group of Amazon employees on Monday won a long-fought appellate battle challenging a company policy they claim caused them to miss out on between 50 and 90 minutes of pay every week.The three workers, based in Connecticut, filed a class action against the e-commerce giant in 2021, claiming they were unlawfully denied pay during mandatory metal detection lines that took place whenever they left the warehouse. These security screenings were implemented by Amazon as a preventative measure to keep workers from stealing merchandise, but the employees claimed they could potentially take between 10 and 20 minutes, time for which they were never compensated.A lower court dismissed their case in 2023. But on Monday — roughly three years after the lawsuit’s dismissal and two years after the workers argued their appellate case — the Second Circuit gave them another shot to win millions in backpay for their fellow Connecticut Amazon workers.The appellate panel found the Connecticut Supreme Court recently reached a ruling that is “squarely at odds” with Amazon’s arguments to keep the case dismissed.First, it found that “the time an employer requires its employees to spend undergoing mandatory security screenings on the employer’s premises is compensable as ‘hours worked.’” The state court also concluded that “Connecticut wage laws do not incorporate a de minimis exception to compensability.”“Thus, taken together, any time that Amazon employees were required to spend undergoing mandatory security screenings, no matter how brief, was compensable under Connecticut law,” the Second Circuit panel wrote in a seven-page summary order.Now the case will head back to Connecticut federal court, where U.S. District Judge Kari Dooley once dismissed the case at Amazon’s behest on the back of a 2014 Supreme Court ruling. That high court precedent held that employers don’t have to compensate workers for “preliminary” and “postliminary” activities under the Portal-to-Portal Act of 1947.Amazon had argued on appeal that Dooley, a Donald Trump appointee, had rightfully dismissed the case on those grounds. The company also argued that employees often made the security screening process longer than it should be by bringing personal belongings into the workplace. If they didn’t, Amazon claimed, then they could walk in and out of the warehouse without breaking stride.The Second Circuit rejected that argument, though, finding the company raised it for the first time on appeal.“Amazon is free to raise this argument on remand, but we do not pass on it here,” the court ruled Monday. “Therefore, we vacate the judgment of the district court and remand for further proceedings consistent with this order and the opinion of the Connecticut Supreme Court.”But even if the suing workers emerge victorious in this case, it will only affect those in Connecticut. Federal law doesn’t require Amazon to pay workers for time spent in screening lines.Amazon didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment on Monday.The Connecticut Supreme Court ruling that effectively negated the company’s appellate claims came earlier this year, after the Second Circuit certified two questions to the state court: whether employees must be compensated for time spent in security screening lines at their workplaces and whether a de minimis exception applies. The Second Circuit’s Monday ruling officially applies those findings to this federal case.Ruling for the panel was U.S. Circuit Judge Joseph Bianco, a Trump appointee, U.S. Circuit Judge Eunice Lee, a Joe Biden appointee, and U.S. Circuit Judge Myrna Perez, another Biden appointee.Amazon’s security screenings at company warehouses have long been a controversial practice among employees. Theft-prevention measures were suspended during the Covid-19 pandemic, but the retailer brought metal detectors back last year, in addition to another policy forcing workers to register their phones’ serial numbers to ensure they aren’t stolen.Subscribe to our free newslettersOur weekly newsletter Closing Arguments offers the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world, while the monthly Under the Lights dishes the legal dirt from Hollywood, sports, Big Tech and the arts.Additional Reads