Apple's annual profit is at least $5 billion, so that is considerably less than 0.1% of their annual profit (and maybe, per year less than 0.01%) AKA its utterly insignificant.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
596 other People opt in Class Action Suite against Apple.
- Thread starter The Reverend
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Apple's annual profit is at least $5 billion, so that is considerably less than 0.1% of their annual profit (and maybe, per year less than 0.01%) AKA its utterly insignificant.
Where my dad works (and has worked, for the last 35 years) the smokers can take 10 minutes here and there no problemo; Other guys - who don't smoke - get yelled at or a letter in their company file if they dawdle around for a few minutes talking.
Talk about equality. I see it myself - the people that complain the most are oftentimes the ones that abuse the company the most. Wasting time when you're supposed to be on the job is the same as stealing form your employer.
CA law may say NO!.. it COULD be very significant!
So your saying it's Ok for Apple to take the cash from it's employees? .. because it's such a small amount?
The State of CA doesn't care about the amount.. it doesn't say anything about if it's less than the annual profit ;that it doesn't count. The State says it's "not ok" to NOT pay wages earned... period!
That much profit would suggest that paying these employees what they earned would be very easy ..." considerably less than 0.1%" ?????
If this issue were only about money though.. this would be over already I'm thinking.
This is about the laws of CA and employee rights... and money!
Here is s list to look at what the different laws say about this case.
I found these links.. they aren't real non-lawyer friendly, but maybe they might help.
The below was copied from the document called Motion for Class Certification
Statutes and Regulations
===============
Cal. Code Civ. Proc. 392 http://law.onecle.com/california/civil-procedure/392.html
Cal. Labor Code 512 http://law.onecle.com/california/labor/512.html
Cal Labor Code 1194 http://law.onecle.com/california/labor/1194.html
Cal. Labor Code 1174 http://law.onecle.com/california/labor/1174.html
Cal. Evid. Code 411 http://law.onecle.com/california/evidence/411.html
If anyone has any real questions about the laws involved with this case please see the doc below for the names of all the lawyers involved and contact them directly.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/12282453/Miles-Maria-VS-Apple-Class-Motion-for-Certification
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer or judge .. or even an expert in general law.
I'm just reading what these documents seem to say and sharing it; and getting general discussion on "How can large corporations like Apple in CA get away with this types of thing? How and why? When they can easily avoid them.
It's not just bad for the employees, it bad for Apples Rep, it's bad for people with Stock in Apple.. they may loose confidence and sell.. it's something that should have been totally avoided.. but seems it may not have been.
So your saying it's Ok for Apple to take the cash from it's employees? .. because it's such a small amount?
The State of CA doesn't care about the amount.. it doesn't say anything about if it's less than the annual profit ;that it doesn't count. The State says it's "not ok" to NOT pay wages earned... period!
That much profit would suggest that paying these employees what they earned would be very easy ..." considerably less than 0.1%" ?????
If this issue were only about money though.. this would be over already I'm thinking.
This is about the laws of CA and employee rights... and money!
Here is s list to look at what the different laws say about this case.
I found these links.. they aren't real non-lawyer friendly, but maybe they might help.
The below was copied from the document called Motion for Class Certification
Statutes and Regulations
===============
Cal. Code Civ. Proc. 392 http://law.onecle.com/california/civil-procedure/392.html
Cal. Labor Code 512 http://law.onecle.com/california/labor/512.html
Cal Labor Code 1194 http://law.onecle.com/california/labor/1194.html
Cal. Labor Code 1174 http://law.onecle.com/california/labor/1174.html
Cal. Evid. Code 411 http://law.onecle.com/california/evidence/411.html
If anyone has any real questions about the laws involved with this case please see the doc below for the names of all the lawyers involved and contact them directly.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/12282453/Miles-Maria-VS-Apple-Class-Motion-for-Certification
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer or judge .. or even an expert in general law.
I'm just reading what these documents seem to say and sharing it; and getting general discussion on "How can large corporations like Apple in CA get away with this types of thing? How and why? When they can easily avoid them.
It's not just bad for the employees, it bad for Apples Rep, it's bad for people with Stock in Apple.. they may loose confidence and sell.. it's something that should have been totally avoided.. but seems it may not have been.
Common Sense != Law
Laws are made for Whiny People
People With Common Sense < Stupid Whiny People
Now derive and solve for X.
If you read that and understood it... You need help.
I love math!!!
I'm expected to turn on all the computers and wash my hands before I start work. I could take my boss to the Tribunal but It wont work because its stupid.
If you seriously think turning on a computer is worth money you'd be shot down in a country where Common Sense = Law. AKA European countries.
This is why Im not too keen to work in America because people lack Common Sense. Yes I can be petty, its my future career.
Laws can be misguided to suit the defender or the attacker...
And people are always interested who the next idiot to sue Apple , Google or Microsoft is. You just happened to of used fancy words.
Laws are made for Whiny People
People With Common Sense < Stupid Whiny People
Now derive and solve for X.
If you read that and understood it... You need help.
I love math!!!
I'm expected to turn on all the computers and wash my hands before I start work. I could take my boss to the Tribunal but It wont work because its stupid.
If you seriously think turning on a computer is worth money you'd be shot down in a country where Common Sense = Law. AKA European countries.
This is why Im not too keen to work in America because people lack Common Sense. Yes I can be petty, its my future career.
Laws can be misguided to suit the defender or the attacker...
And people are always interested who the next idiot to sue Apple , Google or Microsoft is. You just happened to of used fancy words.
Less to say..
It's people like you that keep others in the dark about the law.
You think that by de-valuing other peoples thoughts and statements that somehow that make you better or correct. So much so you have to insult them to make your point.
You could be a better person if you actually used valid points of discussion and laws from where you live and examples others can look at to make up their own minds.
If almost like your job is to look for posting like this and degrade, belittle and otherwise insult the people reading it that might actually care.
Show us your laws and examples: post some links for us to read.
You seem to be whining about the discussion, perhaps you should find something to read that make you not so whiny and a little more happy.
Don't be whiny be happy!
It's people like you that keep others in the dark about the law.
You think that by de-valuing other peoples thoughts and statements that somehow that make you better or correct. So much so you have to insult them to make your point.
You could be a better person if you actually used valid points of discussion and laws from where you live and examples others can look at to make up their own minds.
If almost like your job is to look for posting like this and degrade, belittle and otherwise insult the people reading it that might actually care.
Show us your laws and examples: post some links for us to read.
You seem to be whining about the discussion, perhaps you should find something to read that make you not so whiny and a little more happy.
Don't be whiny be happy!
Common Sense != Law
Laws are made for Whiny People
People With Common Sense < Stupid Whiny People
Now derive and solve for X.
If you read that and understood it... You need help.
I love math!!!
I'm expected to turn on all the computers and wash my hands before I start work. I could take my boss to the Tribunal but It wont work because its stupid.
If you seriously think turning on a computer is worth money you'd be shot down in a country where Common Sense = Law. AKA European countries.
This is why Im not too keen to work in America because people lack Common Sense. Yes I can be petty, its my future career.
Laws can be misguided to suit the defender or the attacker...
And people are always interested who the next idiot to sue Apple , Google or Microsoft is. You just happened to of used fancy words.
It's about money. It's disgruntled employees with no work ethic looking for a handout.
I'm no fan of giant corporations, but this is the definition of frivolous.
It's about money. It's disgruntled employees with no work ethic looking for a handout.
I'm no fan of giant corporations, but this is the definition of frivolous.
Exactly. Have you noticed that The Reverend never, EVER answers people when they point out that they boot their systems, and what not before clocking in for the day? The Reverend dodges those points, because they PROVE how frivolous this lawsuit is.
Da Rev.........
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer or judge .. or even an expert in general law.
I'm just reading what these documents seem to say and sharing it; and getting general discussion on "How can large corporations like Apple in CA get away with this types of thing? How and why? When they can easily avoid them.
Boy, isn't this the truth. I am a lawyer, and the Rev probably will want to go back to law school before attempting to reach a number of the legal conclusions expressed in this thread.
A few points:
1. The granting of a class action certification simply means that there is a commonality of alleged facts and law between the class representative's claim and that of the class members. It is not surprising this was motion was granted, as there does not appear to much dispute regarding the alleged facts, as it appears to have been a common practice. The grant of class certification expressly does not render any opinion on the merits of the matters alleged in the lawsuit. The number of class members has absolutely no bearing on the merits of the lawsuit either. Most class certifications are actually drafted so that the member of the class are parties to the lawsuit automatically once class certification is granted, and that the putative class members have to take affirmative action to opt out of the litigation.
2. In California in particular, wage and hour laws have become so utterly complicated and convoluted, that it takes an expert in the area to guide management as to what they can and can't do regarding issues like this issue. What is allowed and prohibited changes every time our friends in Sacramento decide to tinker with the laws. If the practice is not expressly prohibited, it may be in management's best interests financially to defend a test case. This is particularly true if there are significant cost savings to be had due to the practice. We shall see what the end result will be.
3. Unless you are a client or class member, none of you is going to get ahold of any of the lawyers in this case to discuss litigation involving your favorite company (or the Rev's apparent nemesis). Time is money boys and girls.
4. The free speech guarantees in the State and Federal Constitutions only apply to actions by the government, not corporate entities. If you sign a legal, nondisclosure agreement, that is a private matter between you and your employer. No govermnmental action is involved and no "free speech guarantee" exists. If you don't like your job or the conditions being imposed upon you, quit. There is no indentured serrvitude in this country (any more).
5. The Rev apparently does not much experience with class action litigation. The class action lawsuit was specifically designed to allow a number of individual claimants with factually similar, SMALL DOLLAR AMOUNT claims, to have a representative(s) prove up the case in order to avoid the expense of each individual claimant having to prove up his/her individual claims, one at a time. If you are looking for a big dollar payday from this litigation (assuming it is successful) guess again. As several posters have pointed out, the first things paid are: court costs, legal fees (often in the millions of dollars), payment to the class representative(s), administrative costs (such as giving written notice to thousands or hundreds of thousands of class members, and finally, our class members, who often are left with MUCH less in pocket than had they pursued their own suit.......
6. In California, wage and hour claims are most often brought on behalf of the employee by the California Labor Board, at no cost to the employee. Why is this huge claim not being pursued by the Labor Board instead of private attorneys? Either: (i) the Board determined there was no cause to prosecute, leaving the employees free to pursue private litigation; or (ii) the class action lawyers and representatives convinced the Board not to act, ensuring they got most of the recovery (if there is one).
I am not a fan of the class action process because I believe it has been perverted from a useful legal tool into a cash cow for class action lawyers. I have no opinion regarding the legality of the practice, It sounds like a law school examination question that is designed so that you have a set of facts and laws that lend themselves to good arguments in either direction. Compaired with the other "headline news" lawsuits Apple faces every day, this is probably pretty small potatoes.
And no, the District Attorney and State Attorney General are not going to swoop in and save our brothers slaving away at their terminals. It is a civil matter that will, at the end of the day, only enrich the lawyers......
So, all these employees who claim they spent 5 minutes getting ready for work....I'm guessing that for their full 8 hour shift, they worked every single minute? During those 8 hours, they never got up to use the bathroom, or chat with coworkers about non-work related things, get something to eat or drink from the vending machine, check their personal email, post on message boards whining about the lawsuit, none of that? They're productive for every minute of their full shift? If the answer is yes, then not only do the deserve backpay, but they deserve to be promoted 2 or 3 levels up the chain of command. If they're not superhuman and the answer to that question is no, then they're just like every other worker in the country and don't deserve a dime.
I sometimes arrive at work early, stay a bit late or cut my lunch short and don't ask for overtime pay because I know I spend enough time during the day not being productive to make up for it.
I sometimes arrive at work early, stay a bit late or cut my lunch short and don't ask for overtime pay because I know I spend enough time during the day not being productive to make up for it.
I skipped some pages so I'm sorry if this was already brought up but...
this reminds me of the LA Police Officers' court case about being paid for time putting on the uniform and taking it off before and after their shifts back in may.
http://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/features/overtime-pay-laws-rules-2.html
I know one is about uniforms and one is about waiting to log in to a computer but in general it seems like a similar argument - you should start getting paid the moment you start doing anything your employer requires you to do.
I understand the argument that no one has a task master hovering over them during their entire shift to make sure all breaks are exact, and all time paid is for actual work done, and that in general it all evens out ... but when does the official time clock start ticking?
I wonder if the LAPD court case will be or could be used during the appeal?
this reminds me of the LA Police Officers' court case about being paid for time putting on the uniform and taking it off before and after their shifts back in may.
http://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/features/overtime-pay-laws-rules-2.html
I know one is about uniforms and one is about waiting to log in to a computer but in general it seems like a similar argument - you should start getting paid the moment you start doing anything your employer requires you to do.
I understand the argument that no one has a task master hovering over them during their entire shift to make sure all breaks are exact, and all time paid is for actual work done, and that in general it all evens out ... but when does the official time clock start ticking?
I wonder if the LAPD court case will be or could be used during the appeal?
You haven't even read the case have you?
Your just talking about these posts?
How about you post some law.. with some links for all to look at..not jjst your idea of what the law is.. MR LAWYER
Your just talking about these posts?
How about you post some law.. with some links for all to look at..not jjst your idea of what the law is.. MR LAWYER
The discussion
The discussion is about, if big US company LIKE Apple should be able to skirt the law.
Should they be able to use their employees anyway they wish because they can and everyone is afraid to stand up to them or fear for their jobs.
Look at the fear in the mind of that poor man who recently committed suicide in China, when he lost a prototype iphone. Apple acknowledged that he was one of their employees.. not just a 3rd party sub-contractor.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8162325.stm
Apple ability to have a fear factor within it's employees ranks to such a level is know world wide. Apple internal policies with what it calls protecting it's products is the foundation of that fear factor.
Apple is just an example of what other companies in the USA are doing also.
These companies uses their size to tell there employees they can be easily replaced and the company has no trouble in doing so to ANYONE for any reason.
So this discussion isn't so much about just a bunch of labor laws in CA, USA.
It is more about the Ethical side of business and what big companies get away with. When should a company be responsible, not just profitable.
Yes, America is about capitalism(making a profit).. but it's also about the Right to be treated fairly. To be paid for what you earned, every minute of it.
When is it unfair to the employee and that unfairness is because of the employer?
Then employer is NOT being held responsible for that unfairness?
Does that make the unfairness worse?
Does it suggest to other companies that it's O.K. to be unfair?
Ok so if your going to talk Law.. please post a link to the law your talking about.. so we got a clue like you.
Otherwise, keep reading. New information about this example case is due out any time from the Appeals Courts in California, USA.
Please read the case documents that were submitted to the courts by both parties Apple and Miles Maria. Links to most court documents are in this thread. Or just search google for "Miles Maria VS Apple" using quotes seems to work best.
Thanks all.
The discussion is about, if big US company LIKE Apple should be able to skirt the law.
Should they be able to use their employees anyway they wish because they can and everyone is afraid to stand up to them or fear for their jobs.
Look at the fear in the mind of that poor man who recently committed suicide in China, when he lost a prototype iphone. Apple acknowledged that he was one of their employees.. not just a 3rd party sub-contractor.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8162325.stm
Apple ability to have a fear factor within it's employees ranks to such a level is know world wide. Apple internal policies with what it calls protecting it's products is the foundation of that fear factor.
Apple is just an example of what other companies in the USA are doing also.
These companies uses their size to tell there employees they can be easily replaced and the company has no trouble in doing so to ANYONE for any reason.
So this discussion isn't so much about just a bunch of labor laws in CA, USA.
It is more about the Ethical side of business and what big companies get away with. When should a company be responsible, not just profitable.
Yes, America is about capitalism(making a profit).. but it's also about the Right to be treated fairly. To be paid for what you earned, every minute of it.
When is it unfair to the employee and that unfairness is because of the employer?
Then employer is NOT being held responsible for that unfairness?
Does that make the unfairness worse?
Does it suggest to other companies that it's O.K. to be unfair?
Ok so if your going to talk Law.. please post a link to the law your talking about.. so we got a clue like you.
Otherwise, keep reading. New information about this example case is due out any time from the Appeals Courts in California, USA.
Please read the case documents that were submitted to the courts by both parties Apple and Miles Maria. Links to most court documents are in this thread. Or just search google for "Miles Maria VS Apple" using quotes seems to work best.
Thanks all.
Except that poor man actually worked for Foxconn and not Apple.Look at the fear in the mind of that poor man who recently committed suicide in China, when he lost a prototype iphone. Apple acknowledged that he was one of their employees.. not just a 3rd party sub-contractor.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8162325.stm
Ok ..mistaken
Yeah you right,, Foxconn, one of Apple's largest manufacturers.
And the man working for Foxconn.
The man was Chinese and the company Taiwanese , Not Chinese.
Still Apple is working with a company that, "According to a BBC correspondent in Beijing, Chris Hogg, Foxconn has faced allegations in the past that it treats its employees poorly."
So why is Apple working with this company and ignoring what it does?
"Sun's former classmates have told Chinese newspapers that during the firm's investigation he was beaten, his house was searched and he was locked up alone in a room."
And what did Apple do... pretty much nothing.... no reports about the company doing anything at all beside doing an investigation.
This is just another example of Apple . like many other large US companies just looking the other way so they can make a profit.
here's another article about that.
http://digital.venturebeat.com/2009...-chinese-worker-investigated-commits-suicide/
Yeah you right,, Foxconn, one of Apple's largest manufacturers.
And the man working for Foxconn.
The man was Chinese and the company Taiwanese , Not Chinese.
Still Apple is working with a company that, "According to a BBC correspondent in Beijing, Chris Hogg, Foxconn has faced allegations in the past that it treats its employees poorly."
So why is Apple working with this company and ignoring what it does?
"Sun's former classmates have told Chinese newspapers that during the firm's investigation he was beaten, his house was searched and he was locked up alone in a room."
And what did Apple do... pretty much nothing.... no reports about the company doing anything at all beside doing an investigation.
This is just another example of Apple . like many other large US companies just looking the other way so they can make a profit.
here's another article about that.
http://digital.venturebeat.com/2009...-chinese-worker-investigated-commits-suicide/
Quit ignoring the question. Why do you think you should get paid for turning on your computer? I don't get paid for that. I am expected to be ready to operate 100% before I clock in, that includes booting my system, washing my hands, etc.
And answer this (don't ignore it like you do every other question), do these employees work 100% of the time they are on the clock? Because every off-task thing they do, based on your reasoning, means they should need to pay Apple back for the wasted time. I *guarantee* they waste more time than they spend booting their system.
Of course they do. They work on their resume, personal email, bandwidth testing, etc.
I'm sorry, I couldn't resist.Now back on track....
by the minute
Ok you said " Why do you think you should get paid for turning on your computer? I don't get paid for that. "
-----Dang they screwing you dude! So sad for you.
-----Well you should get paid if it's a job duty.
You said , "I am expected to be ready to operate 100% before I clock in, that includes booting my system, washing my hands, etc."
-----AH ha.. then you claim that WORK is expected of you before YOU begin to get paid.
-----How do you figure thats lawful. Work is work.. Pay is pay.
------Apple holds their service tech on the phone to the second.. that right no to the minute but to the second. each all most be under so many minutes and seconds or they are threatened with loss of job if they do not find a way to keep the calls under the times that are set by Apple.
-----So if a company holds it's employees to the second for every call they take.. then the State of california can hold the company to the minute for paying them... and perhaps even the second.
If any US company wants you to work before you get paid.. they are breaking US labor laws, besides California State labor laws.
Apple should have had a policy that stated that the first 5 minutes of work was for powering on your computer and doing whatever it too to be ready to take calls.. But they didn't have these policies till after this case started.
Ok you said " Why do you think you should get paid for turning on your computer? I don't get paid for that. "
-----Dang they screwing you dude! So sad for you.
-----Well you should get paid if it's a job duty.
You said , "I am expected to be ready to operate 100% before I clock in, that includes booting my system, washing my hands, etc."
-----AH ha.. then you claim that WORK is expected of you before YOU begin to get paid.
-----How do you figure thats lawful. Work is work.. Pay is pay.
------Apple holds their service tech on the phone to the second.. that right no to the minute but to the second. each all most be under so many minutes and seconds or they are threatened with loss of job if they do not find a way to keep the calls under the times that are set by Apple.
-----So if a company holds it's employees to the second for every call they take.. then the State of california can hold the company to the minute for paying them... and perhaps even the second.
If any US company wants you to work before you get paid.. they are breaking US labor laws, besides California State labor laws.
Apple should have had a policy that stated that the first 5 minutes of work was for powering on your computer and doing whatever it too to be ready to take calls.. But they didn't have these policies till after this case started.
Ok you said " Why do you think you should get paid for turning on your computer? I don't get paid for that. "
-----Dang they screwing you dude! So sad for you.
-----Well you should get paid if it's a job duty.
You said , "I am expected to be ready to operate 100% before I clock in, that includes booting my system, washing my hands, etc."
-----AH ha.. then you claim that WORK is expected of you before YOU begin to get paid.
-----How do you figure thats lawful. Work is work.. Pay is pay.
------Apple holds their service tech on the phone to the second.. that right no to the minute but to the second. each all most be under so many minutes and seconds or they are threatened with loss of job if they do not find a way to keep the calls under the times that are set by Apple.
-----So if a company holds it's employees to the second for every call they take.. then the State of california can hold the company to the minute for paying them... and perhaps even the second.
If any US company wants you to work before you get paid.. they are breaking US labor laws, besides California State labor laws.
Apple should have had a policy that stated that the first 5 minutes of work was for powering on your computer and doing whatever it too to be ready to take calls.. But they didn't have these policies till after this case started.
So you STILL IGNORE my main question! Typical. Do these people work 100% of the time they are on the clock, never doing anything personal like talking to a coworker or checking personal email?
I'll answer it for you uberamd - of COURSE they don't! IMO, it stretches credibility for any person to claim they spend absolutely 100% of their work time working - a few minutes of chit-chat here and there add up, and I have yet to hear of an employee saying "Oh I was goofing off for 7 minutes - don't pay me for that today!"
The Reverend certainly believes in his case and we will see how it all plays out. Interesting thing about demands to be paid for every minute at work - at a former employer, they paid in 6 minute increments. Say you were scheduled to start work at 8:00, as long as you were clocked in by 8:05, there was no ding to your pay. So in short, if you were early or late less than 6 minutes, you were no compensated for that time - who knows if it was legal, the company had that practice in place for YEARS with apparently no penalties.
I will say that the number of people that have joined the suit means absolutely nothing - it's the job of the lawyers to track down former employees and ask them if they want in. Many will say "yes" because basically, there's nothing to lose. By signing on, these employees have the chance for a little settlement money coming their way. I'll admit that I was a class action plaintiff for a former employer - this was related to the company supposedly not offering breaks - whatever. It was never a problem for me, but I still collected a whopping $56 for my 3 years of service with the company
How I see it playing out: Apple will offer to settle this case (without admitting any fault), the courts will pay the lawyers and the workers will get a little bit of cash that's left in the end - not nearly as much as expected, but I suppose something is better than nothing.
- of COURSE they don't! IMO, it stretches credibility for any person to claim they spend absolutely 100% of their work time working - a few minutes of chit-chat here and there add up, and I have yet to hear of an employee saying "Oh I was goofing off for 7 minutes - don't pay me for that today!" The Reverend certainly believes in his case and we will see how it all plays out. Interesting thing about demands to be paid for every minute at work - at a former employer, they paid in 6 minute increments. Say you were scheduled to start work at 8:00, as long as you were clocked in by 8:05, there was no ding to your pay. So in short, if you were early or late less than 6 minutes, you were no compensated for that time - who knows if it was legal, the company had that practice in place for YEARS with apparently no penalties.
I will say that the number of people that have joined the suit means absolutely nothing - it's the job of the lawyers to track down former employees and ask them if they want in. Many will say "yes" because basically, there's nothing to lose. By signing on, these employees have the chance for a little settlement money coming their way. I'll admit that I was a class action plaintiff for a former employer - this was related to the company supposedly not offering breaks - whatever. It was never a problem for me, but I still collected a whopping $56 for my 3 years of service with the company
How I see it playing out: Apple will offer to settle this case (without admitting any fault), the courts will pay the lawyers and the workers will get a little bit of cash that's left in the end - not nearly as much as expected, but I suppose something is better than nothing.
work 100% of the time.. your kidding
You said
"Do these people work 100% of the time they are on the clock, never doing anything personal like talking to a coworker or checking personal email?"
You have got to be kidding right? Tell me .. who works 100% of the time.. that is NOT the point at all...
The point is,, working before the clock starts is wrong.. period.
USA trashed slavery "work for no pay" long ago.. perhaps the county in which you live still thinks that slavery is still fine.. as long as it's only a few minutes a day.
Look Apple could have avoided all of this.. but didn't till after the case started. We are NOT talking about employees on a salary .. we are talking about hourly .. so pay by the minute is what we are talking about.
Apple took advantage of over 500 people ,,,
and somehow thats ok with you ..
it's NOT OK with me and many many others.
US companies should never be allowed to do this.. since they can always easily avoid it by creating policies that take care of the employes instead of the company.
The US has a long way to go in protecting it's people from the ravages of large companies that wish to capitalize on employees that have of the lack of knowledge and legal support.
You said
"Do these people work 100% of the time they are on the clock, never doing anything personal like talking to a coworker or checking personal email?"
You have got to be kidding right? Tell me .. who works 100% of the time.. that is NOT the point at all...
The point is,, working before the clock starts is wrong.. period.
USA trashed slavery "work for no pay" long ago.. perhaps the county in which you live still thinks that slavery is still fine.. as long as it's only a few minutes a day.
Look Apple could have avoided all of this.. but didn't till after the case started. We are NOT talking about employees on a salary .. we are talking about hourly .. so pay by the minute is what we are talking about.
Apple took advantage of over 500 people ,,,
and somehow thats ok with you ..
it's NOT OK with me and many many others.
US companies should never be allowed to do this.. since they can always easily avoid it by creating policies that take care of the employes instead of the company.
The US has a long way to go in protecting it's people from the ravages of large companies that wish to capitalize on employees that have of the lack of knowledge and legal support.
Boy, you're a work of art. So it's okay for the worker to take advantage of the company, but not vice versa.
That's not a very intelligent case.