Supreme Court Rejects Appeals Over Pay While Changing Clothes

[Lone_Star_Dem]

Source: CNN Money

WASHINGTON -(Dow Jones)- The U.S. Supreme Court declined to take a fresh look at when federal labor laws require employees (sic) to pay workers for changing into clothing and gear necessary for a particular job. The Supreme Court had three cases to choose from with two involving poultry processors and one involving a public utility.

The high court rejected appeals involving Tyson Foods Inc. (TSN), Cagle's Inc. (CGL) and Consolidated Edison Corp. (ED) and a unit of Entergy Corp. (ETR).

The Cagle's appeal was filed by unionized workers who sued because the company would not pay them for time spent putting on and taking off sanitary and protective gear at a Camilla, Ga., poultry processing facility. The workers want the high court to reverse a federal appeals court ruling that said the donning and doffing of protective equipment was excluded from the Fair Labor Standards Act. The case is Anderson v. Cagle's Inc., 07-910.

Tyson Foods filed a separate appeal seeking reversal of an appeals court ruling that makes it harder for employers to exclude from pay the time spent donning and doffing protective gear. The company is challenging a ruling by the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia, which ruled in a case involving workers at two Pennsylvania processing plants. The case is Tyson Foods Inc. v. Felix de Asencio, 07-1014.

Read more: http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/djf500/200806091052DOWJONESDJONLINE000329_FORTUNE5.htm

[BlooInBloo]

1. Uh... "employers", perhaps?

[Lone_Star_Dem]

2. Yep. Their typo though, not mine

Do you think I should add (employers) behind it so people don't get confused?

[BlooInBloo]

3. That's what "(sic)" is for.

EDIT: Not being able to type brackets is one of the few things that fucking pisses me off about DU.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

4. Done

After our exchange I imagine most people will get the intended meaning now.

[BlooInBloo]

6. Perfect!

[Schema Thing]

7. ooh, (sic) burn

:P

[Dogmudgeon]

10. Here's how to type square brackets

[You have to type them in as "HTML Entities".]

The left bracket is _&_#_91_;_

The right bracket is _&_#_93_;_

Just take the underscores out to use them.

You'll need a table of the ANSI codes to refer to if you want to do Cyrillic or Greek or other fancy character sets. There are also a few quirks in editing; they will convert back to regular characters and you'll have to re-do the codes again. But once you get the hang of it, it's easy.

--p!

[papau]

5. Another anti-worker ruling from our leaders

[angstlessk]

8. hell, I thought their decision was so off the cuff to deny workers any rights

that the supremes were changing clothes and rejected the workers pay .. should not be WHILE changing clothes..it should be OVER changing clothes...

[jberryhill]

12. No, you read it right

Apparently, the justices made up their mind on the way out of the court, while they were changing out of their robes into their leisure wear.

Video here:

http://www.youtube.com/v/g_oMeNJfLEI

[angstlessk]

13. too funny by twice.. or is that half? thanks for that!!! n/t

[VP505]

9. Any company worth working for

wouldn't argue against that, its one of those little things that helps worker morale and can end up costing the company more in the long run when workers get pissed off over it.

[Massacure]

11. What it should come down to is the question "can a worker put on the clothes at his own house?"

If the answer is no, the company should pay for the time needed to put it on.