Net Neutrality

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

Bup, bup, bup.

Employers can't steal labor from employees without compensation.

They can, however, steal as much time as they like as long as what you are doing in that time isn't integral.

Did none of you even read the Sotomayor decision?

I read that rambling bullshit and instantly decided that if I were a warehouse employee I’d skip the security check immediately. When Amazon fires me for not doing my job I’d counter sue, citing Sotomayor, and point out that Security checks aren’t integral to my job, therefore I was wrongfully terminated.

Right?

I am having a hard time understanding how something that isn't integral is still grounds for termination... but I am not a clever Supreme Court jurist, so I am liable to miss some of the finer points.

[Fife]

Fife never did answer me as to how many hours of free labor he would deem too many. TC says it's unlimited - can be days or weeks. I'd like to hear from the libertarian.

Bullshit question. How many times a week is the boss giving you shit attitude at work too much?

Totally fair question. You believe employees shouldn't be paid for time spent doing something their boss requires. Currently, for AZ employees, that's about 2.5 hours a week.

If they were waiting in those lines for 10 hours a week, would you see the need to pay them? How about 40 hours a week? Unlimited?

Why are you afraid to answer this question?

Yes, Kath, I'm very, very afraid.

Your feelz-based analysis isn't all that scary really, it's just pedestrian.

OK; nobody can answer your bullshit question. It might be 5 minutes; it might be 5 hours. It all depends upon the nature of the screening and all the attending circumstances. And it is most important to consider if the employee accepted the employment know the circumstance of the screening and how it affects total compensation.

It seems obvious that SCOTUS considered the time constraints in this particular case to not be "too much."

Any amount of time that becomes something amounting to being unreasonably detained would amount to the tort of false imprisonment, and would create a civil right of action against the employer and/or a defense to termination for cause.

Nobody, and I mean nobody, has a right to keep you somewhere against your will.

[Fife]

Bup, bup, bup.

Employers can't steal labor from employees without compensation.

They can, however, steal as much time as they like as long as what you are doing in that time isn't integral.

Did none of you even read the Sotomayor decision?

I read that rambling bullshit and instantly decided that if I were a warehouse employee I’d skip the security check immediately. When Amazon fires me for not doing my job I’d counter sue, citing Sotomayor, and point out that Security checks aren’t integral to my job, therefore I was wrongfully terminated.

Right?

I am having a hard time understanding how something that isn't integral is still grounds for termination... but I am not a clever Supreme Court jurist, so I am liable to miss some of the finer points.

Congress passed that POS. Don't blame me for being able to read English, blame the fuckers who wrote it. Don't like the outcome? Write your congressman, or better yet, throw your hat in the ring.

[nmoore63]

Bup, bup, bup.

Employers can't steal labor from employees without compensation.

They can, however, steal as much time as they like as long as what you are doing in that time isn't integral.

Did none of you even read the Sotomayor decision?

Their employer apparently considers it integral, hence its required.

[DBTrek]

Nobody, and I mean nobody, has a right to keep you somewhere against your will.

That’s exactly what I told that fascist at the DUI checkpoint, but he tased me then gave me a pile driver on the ashphalt.

[nmoore63]

Congress passed that POS. Don't blame me for being able to read English, blame the fuckers who wrote it. Don't like the outcome? Write your congressman, or better yet, throw your hat in the ring.

The law was written in 1947 in response to minimum wages laws. The law's, Portal-to-Portal, legislative intent is clearly for commuting and other task where the employee would be in control.

[nmoore63]

Bup, bup, bup.

Employers can't steal labor from employees without compensation.

They can, however, steal as much time as they like as long as what you are doing in that time isn't integral.

Did none of you even read the Sotomayor decision?

Employee's don't get to decide was is integral. The second I make it a requirement, that's it.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

Bup, bup, bup.

Employers can't steal labor from employees without compensation.

They can, however, steal as much time as they like as long as what you are doing in that time isn't integral.

Did none of you even read the Sotomayor decision?

Employee's don't get to decide was is integral. The second I make it a requirement, that's it.

Apparently, employers don't decide what is integral either, courts do.

I am sure that is well within the intent of the Portal to Portal gutting of the FLSA.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

I read that rambling bullshit and instantly decided that if I were a warehouse employee I’d skip the security check immediately. When Amazon fires me for not doing my job I’d counter sue, citing Sotomayor, and point out that Security checks aren’t integral to my job, therefore I was wrongfully terminated.

Right?

I am having a hard time understanding how something that isn't integral is still grounds for termination... but I am not a clever Supreme Court jurist, so I am liable to miss some of the finer points.

Congress passed that POS. Don't blame me for being able to read English, blame the fuckers who wrote it. Don't like the outcome? Write your congressman, or better yet, throw your hat in the ring.

Dear congressperson,
Plez stop activist judges from legislating from the bench.
K thanks

[The Conservative]

It is, when someone signed a contract agreeing to go through said actions.

Yep. The court ruled it's legal.
However, agreeing to go through security screening as you enter and leave a facility is a little different than agreeing to sacrifice 2.5 hours a week to being incarcerated at your workplace without compensation.

Kinda like "Hey, if you want to work at Disneyland you have to wear the Mickey Mouse Costume"
"Ok, sounds good."

-two weeks later-

"You guys never said I had to wait in line for 90 minutes every day to pick up the costume before I can put it on. You owe me pay for that extra hour and a half a day"
"Nope, we told you you had to wear a costume and you agreed"
Derp.

There's what's legal, and then there's what's right.
Legally we can extraordinary rendition you into a Libyan torture hellhole without notifying anyone of your whereabouts.
Is that right?

Other way around, it would be as if after the person wearing the Mickey costume got out of it, and then wasn't paid for walking out of the area to their car. Then demanding because he/she was still on Disney property, even though he/she clocked out, they deserve to get paid because...REASONS!

The answer to that is a resounding fuck no.