Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

SCOTUS and "donning and duffing" Federal

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • SCOTUS and "donning and duffing" Federal

    The US Supreme Court (SCOTUS) issued a ruling on the Tyson case. "Donning and duffing" is when the employee is required to change clothing or safety equipment on the job. For some reason all of the big cases seem to involve chicken processing, where your clothing gets bloody and and you have mandatory safety equipment. The Tyson case is largely a "status que" decision. Nothing big changed for most employers. What most people would consider the rules before are unchanged. What is interesting is the Tyson tried to argue against statistical methods of determining the penalty. Say 1,000 workers who average 10 minutes to don/duff, Tyson wanted to argue that you needed to determine each workers time separately, and not use the average. Tyson lost. Tyson also wanted to argue the damages applied method but SCOTUS refused to hear that. Pretty technical stuff, but for most people, no change from before.

    http://www.wagehourblog.com/2016/03/...6075c-70607629

    The key is that with 3 big chicken cases and several police officer cases, donning and duffing is pretty well establish law at this point, and there is a pretty high bar for donning and duffing to be consider hours worked.
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away".
    Philip K. **** (1928-1982)

  • #2
    I find it odd that Tyson is arguing against using statistical averages. Usually the plaintiffs want to count every minute owed and the company just wants to use a broad brush to determine what is owed.

    Last year when my company revised our uniform policy, we also updated to donning and duffing with punching before donning and after duffing. Seems the easiest way to protect the company against a claim.

    Comment


    • #3
      I think that Tyson would argue that the Earth revolves around the Moon if it helped win their case. The thing all employers hate about statistical methods is that they make class action lawsuits easier. Tyson would much rather force their 1,000+ employees to sue them one at a time and prove actual hours worked and not paid one employee at a time.

      You made a good point. You are paying something. It is a lot easier to defend something then to defend nothing.
      "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away".
      Philip K. **** (1928-1982)

      Comment

      Working...
      X