Labor & Employment Law Daily Wrap Up, WAGE-HOUR—WORKING TIME—D. Nev.: Amazon warehouse workers not engaged in compensable work during pre-lunch screenings, (Jan 10, 2025)

By Ronald Miller, J.D.

Security screenings are not “integral and indispensable” to the employees’ duties because not an intrinsic element of retrieving products from warehouse shelves or packaging them for shipment.

Amazon warehouse employees were not engaged in compensable work under the FLSA where they alleged that they were required to leave their working areas go through a security screening and then walk some distance before eating their meals, ruled a federal district court in Nevada. Similarly, the court determined that neither walking after security screenings nor time spent in a queue to clock back in at the end of the meal period was compensable under the FLSA. Thus, the court concluded that the employees cannot state a claim for unpaid wages or overtime under the FLSA arising from time spent queueing to clock in at the conclusion of their meal period. However, the court stayed proceedings on claims alleging violations of Nevada law because the Nevada Supreme accepted a certified question in Malloy v. Amazon.com Services, LLC (Solares v. Amazon.com Services, LLC, No. 2:24-cv-00881-EJY (D. Nev. Jan. 8, 2025)).

Meals break claims. There was no dispute that Amazon required its employees to leave their workstations to take a 30-minute meal break. All employees clock out at the commencement of their meal breaks. However, because Amazon allegedly failed to provide adequate space to take meal breaks within the working areas, “approximately 75%” of employees must exit the working area to take their meal breaks.

The employees who leave the working area must go through a security screening and then walk some distance before eating their meals. According to the employees, waiting in the security screening lines causes at least a five-to-ten-minute delay in starting their meal period after they clock out. Employees alleged that they are required to clock back in at the end of their meal period and further asserted they must do so less than one minute past the 30 minute meal period ends or be subject to reprimand.

Meal break security screenings. According to the employees, time spent in security screenings to exit the working area and commence their meal break, travel time to areas to take meal breaks after security screenings, and time spent in queues waiting to clock back in at the end of meal periods is “working time for purposes of the FLSA, at least as not limited by the Portal-to-Portal Act ….”

The employees also argued that, because Amazon “requires” employees to leave the work area, this case is distinguishable from all those on which Amazon relied. The employees cited In re: Amazon.com, Inc., Fulfillment Center Fair Labor Standards Act and Wage and Hour Litigation v. Integrity Staffing Solutions, Inc., 905 F.3d 387 (6th Cir. 2018), petition for rehearing denied, cert. denied., 140 S.Ct. 112 (2019) (Integrity II), in arguing that the Sixth Circuit “found” security screening related to meal period breaks was work time. The employees argued that the Portal-to-Portal Act (PPA) applies only to pre- and postliminary work and is not applicable to “mandatory meal break security screenings ….”

Here, there was no dispute that the employees were relieved of all work when they clocked out for their meal period. In fact, they were removed from the working areas such that they could perform no work during their meal period. Also, there was no allegation that the employees’ meal periods were interrupted by employer requests that they engage in work-related activities immediately after or intermittently after the start of their 30 minute meal breaks.

Leaving work area. The issue before the court was whether the employees stated FLSA claims for unpaid wages and overtime for those employees allegedly required to: (1) leave the work area to take meal breaks because of inadequate space for such breaks, and thus went through screening after clocking out; and (2) walk longer distances before getting to a location where they eat. The employees also sought compensation for the time spent waiting in line to clock back in at the end of their meal period.

However, the court determined that the employees did not state a claim under the FLSA for time spent in security screenings associated with meal periods. Further, the court concluded that neither walking after security screenings nor time spent in a queue to clock back in at the end of the meal period was compensable under the FLSA.

Clocking out. First, the court found no case in which time spent walking to commence eating a meal after clocking out or waiting to clock back in at the end of a meal break was compensable under the FLSA. Second, under the FLSA, and PPA regulation, non-compensability is generally the result. Third, the Ninth Circuit decision in Busk v. Integrity Staffing found that walking to a lunchroom was “not necessary to the plaintiffs’ principal work as warehouse employees.”

Fourth, walking time was not compensable simply because it occurs attendant to the commencement or cessation of work activities. The employees had been relieved of all work activities for a meal period. Given that security screenings are not integral or indispensable to Amazon employees’ principal activities, time spent walking immediately after going through a security screening is not part of a continuous workday.

In the absence of a cohesive and persuasive argument, and given that the court could find no precedent supporting the compensability of queueing to clock in from a meal period in any factually similar case decided by a federal court, the court concluded that the employees cannot state a claim for unpaid wages or overtime under the FLSA arising from time spent queueing to clock in at the conclusion of their meal period.

The case is No. 2:24-cv-00881-EJY.

Judge: Youchah, E.

Attorneys: James P. Kemp (Kemp & Kemp) for Jasmine Solares. Amy L. Thompson (Littler Mendelson) for Amazon.com Services, LLC.

Companies: Amazon.com Services, LLC

Cases: WageHour ClassActions WorkingTime StateLawClaims NevadaNews GCNNews