Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Labor & Employment Law Blogs -> Wage & Hour - Development & Highlights
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Labor & Employment Law
: Wage & Hour - Development & HighlightsLock and Unload!: De Minimis Plus Failure to Mention Equals Dismissal of Class Action
By Mark E. Tabakman, Esq.
In Albrecht et al. v. Wackenhut Corp., the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York has dismissed a lawsuit in which approximately 115 security guards accused their employer, Wackenhut Corp., of violating the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York State Labor Law by not paying them for time spent arming up, checking through security and arming down.
The plaintiffs alleged that that these duties took roughly 15 minutes per day and that they should be compensated for that time. However, the Court found that all three of the processes took less than a minute each to complete. On that basis, the Court reasoned that these preliminary and postliminary activities were not subject to compensation under the Fair Labor Standards Act as they were de minimis in nature.
Additionally, Wackenhut had implemented a daily briefing for all guards at the Ginna facility, and, consequently, the guards had to report for duty 15 minutes before the start of their scheduled shifts. The parties agreed that they were being compensated for that time, but the plaintiffs claimed the briefings were not included in overtime calculations. The Court rejected this contention because it was not included in the complaint nor mentioned in the depositions. Moreover, the Court pointed out that Wackenhut's policy called for the briefing time to be compensated at the guards' normal base rate for time under 40 hours in a week and at the guards' overtime rate for time over 40 hours in a week.
Accordingly, the court dismissed the case. The point is that the de minimis doctrine covers only fleeting, inconsequential periods of time. Although the employer in this case succeeded in having the case dismissed, if the time had actually been shown to be 10-15 minutes per day, or, roughly, an hour per week, that would not have been deemed inconsequential and the class action would have been viable. Repetitive duties, done every day, will not be de minimis if the aggregate time, on a weekly basis, exceeds a small amount of time.
Full post as published by Wage & Hour - Development & Highlights on September 30, 2009 (boomark / email).
Paxil Lawsuit
Paxil Claims, Lawsuits, and Injuries
Pet Food Recall and Deaths
Dogs and Cats Sickened by Tainted Menu Food Products
Smoke and Carbon Monoxide Alarm Failure
Trasylol
allegedly causing kidney and heart failure.
Hip & Knee Replacement
alleging sterilization practices can cause implant failure.
Tarceva
Safety Data Show Association with Liver Failure and Death
Failure-to-accommodate claim yields $1.82M award
$1.82 Million Awarded in Employment Lawsuit
Medtronic CD Horizon
allegedly recalled as defective device for being prone to failure, shearing and cable breaks.

Is there a de minimis defence available in assault cases
Failure to Exhaust Administrative Remedies Results in Dismissal of Action







