The Return of the Corporate Court

[marmar]

from truthdig:


The Return of the Corporate Court

Posted on Oct 2, 2014
By Bill Blum


Jesse Busk has almost no chance of winning his lawsuit when it comes before the Supreme Court for oral argument Wednesday during the opening week of the new 2014-15 term. His dismal prospects stem not from any legal weaknesses in his case but from one overriding fatal flaw—he’s an ordinary working person challenging the prerogatives of corporate power. Cases like his seldom succeed before the panel led by Chief Justice John Roberts, rated by many observers and scholars as the most pro-business iteration of the high tribunal since the early 1930s.

Busk used to work as an Amazon.com “warehouse associate” in Las Vegas, filling orders placed by customers of the online retail behemoth, earning between $11.65 and $12.35 an hour without health care or paid leave for shifts that typically lasted 12 hours. Technically, he wasn’t employed by Amazon but by Delaware-based Integrity Staffing Solutions Inc., a high-powered nationwide agency that provides temporary workers to Amazon as well as other big-name companies such as Walmart, JPMorgan Chase and Zappos.com.

As depicted in the CNBC documentary “Amazon Rising” that aired in June, the services that warehouse associates perform hoisting commodities large and small off shelves and onto giant conveyor belts for packing and mailing are grueling and unrelenting, relieved only by 30-minute meal breaks and brief trips to the bathroom that are discouraged by supervisors. One former employee interviewed in the film described her stint at the massive complexes that Amazon euphemistically labels “fulfillment centers” as akin to time served “in a prison.”

In 2010, Busk and Laurie Castro, a warehouse associate from the fulfillment center in Fernley, Nev., filed a federal class-action lawsuit against Integrity, alleging violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act, the New Deal-era statute designed to protect the rights of hourly workers to minimum wages, prompt paychecks and overtime. Among other grievances, they contended they were owed back pay for uncompensated time spent checking out of work each day, standing in airport-like security lines for up to 25 minutes. Together with hundreds of other workers, they were required to remove their wallets, keys and belts, and made to pass through metal detectors and sometimes had their bodies passed over with hand-held wands to prevent employee theft and what Amazon calls “inventory shrinkage.” ....................(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_return_of_the_corporate_court_20141002

[bobGandolf]

1. Thanks for sharing...

It never ceases to amaze me how corporate America manages to squeeze every dime, and offer none, or the most minimal, job benefits.

[lonestarnot]

2. Return?

When did it go away?

[MohRokTah]

4. The Warren Court was fairly citizen friendly.

Certainly less pro-business than the current iteration of the court.

[lonestarnot]

6. Going to take years to change it, even if it can be changed. To many richie richers sucking blood.

[MohRokTah]

7. All we really need is for a Democrat to win in 2016 and a large Dem majority in the Senate.

Scalia and Kennedy are both 78. If Ginsburg can hold out until then we should see both Scalia and Kennedy leaving the court in the next decade one way or another.

Thomas may lose heart for the court if Scalia goes, and Roberts may not want to be CJ of a liberal court, too.

[Octafish]

3. Wilding for Dollars

[liberal_at_heart]

5. but how can this be? This week's employment numbers state that we are on the road to recover.

People are not dumb. They can feel a recovery, and they can also feel when there is not a recovery. We need a strong labor union again, but we will have to fight to get it back. We let it slip away, and now we have to start all over again from the beginning.

[Trillo]

8. Workers are treated like criminals,

while the boss ignores the law?

[mickg99]

9. The Obama Administration has weighed in on behalf of the employers in this case

Saddest of all is that the administration has weighed in on the side of Integrity Staffing -- I think that's pathetic.

"The Obama administration has filed a brief backing Integrity Staffing. Signed by lawyers from the Labor and Justice Departments, the administration’s brief said the Ninth Circuit’s focus on whether antitheft checks were done for the employer’s benefit was “an insufficient proxy for determining” whether they were integral and indispensable to a principal activity."


http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/04/business/justices-weighing-wages-for-after-work-screenings-.html

[Babel_17]

10. Salon, today, has an article with an interview

http://www.salon.com/2014/10/08/amazons_gross_new_innovation_how_theyre_shortchanging_everyday_americans/

To get a sense of the specifics of the case, as well as its potentially far-reaching implications, Salon spoke on Tuesday with Catherine Ruckelshaus, general counsel and program director for the National Employment Law Project. Our conversation is below and has been edited for clarity and length.

When news broke that the Obama administration was siding with the employers in this case, was that your expectation? Or was it a surprise to you and others in the field?

Yes, we were very surprised. The position that the government’s taking is directly contrary to some of the Department of Labor rulings and regulations, so it’s very confusing and surprising to us. And it certainly doesn’t square with what the administration has been saying, and taking steps on, around minimum wage and trying to advocate for … more money in the pockets of low-wage workers, in particular.

[Babel_17]

11. Billions could be at stake

The case has mobilized other interested parties on both sides. The industry group National Retail Federation (NRF) and the United States federal government have both filed amicus briefs siding with Integrity Staffing; two months ago, the labor coalition AFL-CIO filed a brief of its own supporting Busk and Castro.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/supreme-court-case-overtime

It would be great for the economy if the workers win. More money that would mostly be immediately spent on goods and services.

But it goes to fundamental decency, imo, and not incentivizing acting like a shit-heel.

Can we see a kick to this thread?

[Babel_17]

12. Now MSNBC is running with the story

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/supreme-court-case-overtime

The Wall Street Journal as well is on it. It will be interesting to see who gets pushed forward to explain the government's rationale.