Kraft to pay $4M in back wages for PPE donning and doffing
January 31, 2011 by Fred HosierPosted in: In this week's e-newsletter, Latest News & Views, PPE (protective equipment), What do you think?, new court decision
The question of whether companies are required to pay employees for the time it takes them to put on and take off required safety gear is still complicated. Now, the U.S. Supreme Court has taken a pass on a case, leaving in place a lower court ruling.
Kraft Foods requires employees who prepare meat products at its Oscar Mayer plant in Madison, WI, to wear safety gear such as steel-toed boots, hard hats and hair nets.
A local unit of the United Food and Commercial Workers Union and Kraft had agreed through bargaining that this time is not compensable. The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) allows unions and management to trade off the number of compensable hours against the wage rate. In other words, workers get more per hour in exchange for excluding time for such things as putting on safety gear.
Some Kraft workers disagreed with the tradeoff struck in their collective bargaining agreement and want the time included at the higher hourly rate that the union negotiated.
The workers argue that Wisconsin state law doesn’t have the collective bargaining exception that’s included in the FLSA.
Kraft claims the FLSA preempts Wisconsin’s law.
The case went to the U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. It ruled that the FLSA did not preempt Wisconsin law and that the workers should be paid for the time spent putting on and taking off safety gear.
Kraft appealed the Seventh Circuit decision to the U.S. Supreme Court. The nation’s highest court denied Kraft’s petition to hear the case, so the appeals court decision stands. (Note: The decision only applies to states in the region served by the Seventh Circuit.)
Kraft will reportedly begin paying 1,300 current and former employees about $4 million in back pay.
You can read the Seventh Circuit’s decision here.
What’s the best way to handle whether workers get paid for the time to put on and take off required safety gear? Let us know what you think in the Comments Box below.
SafetyNewsAlert.com delivers the latest Safety news once a week to the inboxes of over 270,000 Safety professionals.
Click here to sign up and start your FREE subscription to SafetyNewsAlert!
Tags: donning and doffing, FLSA, Kraft Foods, safety gear, steel-toed boots
Loading ...
February 1st, 2011 at 6:56 am
After reading this article and swallowing my vomit, I can understand why the world laughs at us. What’s next? Paying them by the foot step to their work station?
February 1st, 2011 at 11:56 am
I’m required to wear shoes that are not open-toed or open-heeled, and I’m required to tuck in my shirt for safety reasons, and my pants can’t be tattered for safety reasons, so my normal wardrobe can be considered PPE. My company should pay me to get dressed in the morning.
February 1st, 2011 at 6:26 pm
It makes me sick. No wonder job are going over seas. I would give Kraft the benefit of the doubt they were dealing in good faith. A deals a deal with the union. make the money come out of the union dues if member felt that they were short changed. Also lets see?? safty gear PPE as simple as putting on boots, hair net & hard hat. OMG how long did it take them. five minute a day max, oh wait with union people i am sure it took another 15 because we could not rush them. An employee is to take some responsibllity for using PPE.
February 4th, 2011 at 10:46 am
What a crock!! Let them get dressed for their job on their own time like everyone else. Daniel’s post, tho maybe tongue-in-cheek - is right on. According to this feeble-brained court decision, if I come to work looking scrungy, but am required to wear certain attire on the job (dress pants, white long sleeve shirt, necktie), shouldn’t I therefore be paid to change into that proper attire? Yeah right! My bosses would go for that now, wouldn’t they? I sometimes think we deserve to lose jobs to foreign countries because we allow unqualified, half-witted people to make unreasonable, half-witted decisons that have adverse effects on all of us.
February 9th, 2011 at 11:10 am
TO SAY COMPANIES LEAVE OVERSEAS FOR THIS VERY REASON IS INSANE,,,,,COMPANIES LEAVE BECAUSE OF GREED AND GREED ONLY… DO THEY LOWER THEIR PRICES AFTER THEY LEAVE AND GET $2.00 A DAY LABOR ???? NO ,,,THE GREEDY C.E.O.’S POCKET EVEN MORE MILLIONS,,,I AM SICKENED EVERY TIME I HEAR SOMEONE SHOWING SYMPATHY FOR THESE GREEDY $@$#%#’S
BECAUSE SOMEONE MAKES $20.00 PER HOUR ,,,THATS A SHAME….IF YOU PEOPLE DON’T WAKE UP YOU’LL SEE WHY THERE ARE UNION’S ….IT’S SO WE DO NOT HAVE TO WORK FOR $2.00 A DAY !!!!!
THESE COPRORATIONS WANT US ALL TO FEEL SORRY FOR THEM AS THEY RAISE GAS PRICES AND FORCLOSE OUR HOMES !!!!! WAKE UP PEOPLE !!!!
February 9th, 2011 at 2:06 pm
Tracy,
Our companies are going overseas because they can’t make a profit here. Would you run a business if you were paying out more than you take in? If you pay your employees more money, you have to charge more money for your product. If you charge too much, the consumers will buy a cheaper brand, probably made in another country. There are a lot of factors that cause companies to go overseas. It’s not just greed. Sometimes it’s just survival. It’s the same reason I can’t always afford to buy American-made. Or maybe I’m just greedy…
February 12th, 2011 at 11:31 pm
The people who are against this ruling do not have a clue. I work for Kraft Foods in a different plant. We are required to don a uniform, safety shoes, safety glasses, hair net and beard covers. On or own time. We are required to put our personal items away before we have our beginning of shift meeting. Oh, if my start time 6:00 A.M. and my meeting is 6:00 A.M. and if I am late then I am subject to disciplinary actions. So to be compliant, I need to get to work 15 minutes early on my own time non compensated. Oh, I am also required to attend a meeting at the end of my shift. This meeting regularly lasts 5 to 10 minutes after my time to clock out. So, I usually leave the premises 15 minutes later than my quitting time. Guess what. They do not pay me for that. So, now it looks like I will be seeking legal counsel. Maybe, gather together 20 or so of my fellow workers, file suit and get the back pay that has been taken illegally (according to The Fair Labor Act). As usual, you do gooders do not have the facts. Or maybe you work for Kraft management.
February 15th, 2011 at 9:42 am
danl62 - That meeting at the end of your shift, you’re required to attend but not paid for it? My guess is you are a non-exempt employee so I think they have to pay you since you are still on the clock.
I understand the emotion you have about this issue, but look at the logic of it. Most workers are required to be in proper work dress at the start of their shift. Why should it be any different for your group and similar groups?
February 15th, 2011 at 11:54 pm
The meeting at the end of my shift starts 10 minutes before my shift ends. It regularly runs 5 to 10 minutes long and no, we do not get paid for it. I believe that is a violation of labor law. Most workers are required to be in proper dress?? I don’t know. I come to work in decent clothes and then have to change into a uniform the company requires for sanitation and safety reasons. According FLA that is a violation if they do not pay us for that time. There is no collective bargaining agreement which negotiated those 15 minutes away. We are a non union plant. Management does not have to change clothes. And they are on the production floor regularly. Tell me why they and their group should be different? Your logic is flawed.
Yes, I am a non-exempt employee and they are not paying us when we are still on the clock. Don’t take just a quick snapshot of the problem. There are a lot more factors involved. All most employees are asking for is that the rules to be applied fairly and equitably.
February 16th, 2011 at 6:29 pm
Daniel Says:
February 1st, 2011 at 11:56 am
I’m required to wear shoes that are not open-toed or open-heeled, and I’m required to tuck in my shirt for safety reasons, and my pants can’t be tattered for safety reasons, so my normal wardrobe can be considered PPE. My company should pay me to get dressed in the morning.
Daniel, you just don’t get it. You can wear your clothes from home and go to work. I can wear nice clothes from home BUT I still have to change when I get to work. I can not wear the uniform home and to work due to sanitation reasons. This is required by the company. It is not my decision. I have to change at work. The FLA says the worker should be compensated.
February 17th, 2011 at 9:11 am
danl62 - First, if you’re non-exempt and not being paid for the extra 5 - 10 minutes the meeting runs past your supposed shift end, it IS as violation of labor laws. Second, equal application of the law would mean everybody should be properly dressed for their job at the start of their shift until the end of their shift. That is not the case because Kraft now has to pay for people to change BEFORE the start of their shift. I undertand your beef with the extra 5-10 minutes for the end-of-shift meeting but I don’t understand your beef with the clothes changing issue. It seems to me Kraft employees got a favorable outcome on this one.
February 17th, 2011 at 10:04 am
At our facility, the traffic is often so bad coming into our plant at the beginning of shift that, if you don’t arrive 10-15 minutes early, you could very likely be late clocking in, and you will get charged an incident. Some people get here 30 minutes early just to make sure they don’t run into problems. We don’t have people complain about the 15-30 minutes that they are obligated to give but do not get compensated for. If they don’t like it, they can go find another company to work for that doesn’t have traffic congestion.
February 17th, 2011 at 7:50 pm
Whatmeworry Says:
February 17th, 2011 at 9:11 am
Well, maybe you did not read the ruling. People who do not work on the cutting floor do not have to change their clothes when they start work. It is ONLY the people who are required to put on protective gear when they get to work. So tell me why it is OK for someone who works in HR or payroll or accounting etc. to come to work 7 or 8 minutes later everyday because they do not have to change. They get paid when they walk in the door whereas the line worker has to come in 7 or 8 minutes earlier and leave 7 or 8 minutes later everyday. I am required to change out my clothes I came to work in and into a uniform, safety shoes, hair net etc. If I could take the uniform home and wear it work…no problem. But I can not. This is required by the company and is extra compared to the other workers I mentioned. IMO, it is a closed and shut case. Make it fair and equitable for all employees. Treat them all the same. That is all the employees are asking for.
February 17th, 2011 at 7:55 pm
Daniel Says:
February 17th, 2011 at 10:04 am
At our facility, the traffic is often so bad coming into our plant at the beginning of shift that, if you don’t arrive 10-15 minutes early, you could very likely be late clocking in, and you will get charged an incident. Some people get here 30 minutes early just to make sure they don’t run into problems. We don’t have people complain about the 15-30 minutes that they are obligated to give but do not get compensated for. If they don’t like it, they can go find another company to work for that doesn’t have traffic congestion.
Again your logic is flawed. The traffic outside the plant is not the fault of the company. They are not responsible for the traffic. They ARE responsible for the working conditions in the plant and that the working conditions are fair and equitable and safe for all. If they don’t like it then maybe they can find a job in China or India or Vietnam.
February 18th, 2011 at 9:52 am
I’m sorry, but I just find it really hard to feel sorry for you guys. Life’s not always fair, and the job’s not always fair. Different jobs have different responsibilities, different pay scales, different prerequisites. If the biggest complaint you have is that you have to get to work 7 or 8 minutes early so you can don your PPE and not get paid for it, count your blessings. Just stop complaining. You’re embarrassing yourself.
February 18th, 2011 at 5:51 pm
Daniel
I really am not looking for sympathy from you. So you can check that off of your worry list. And please don’t lecture me about life. You don’t have the authority or life experience to do that. This is about a court ruling. Nothing else. You have stooped low and let this get personal for you. Complaining? This is a blog where one is free to express their opinions and feelings as long as the moderators deem your post to be appropiate. Maybe this is the first time for you on a site like this. Don’t worry. If you work on it, you might be able to understand how it works and not let your personal predujices surface. This is about workers’ rights and a Circuit Court of Appeals decision and different opinions and thoughts from people from all walks of life about this decision. Embarrassing myself? You should take a hard look in the mirror.
February 21st, 2011 at 12:40 pm
danl62 - Apparently you are not covered by a CBA, unlike the Kraft plant that WON their case. The rules for you will be different. I suggest you gather together as many of your equally disgruntled co-workers as you can and retain an attorney to find out if 1) the unpaid extra time is a violation of labor laws (my guess is yes) and 2) you have any recourse for the pre-shift unpaid donning of safety attire. Your spouting off to Daniel and Whatmeworry won’t change anything. Channel your energy to where it will do you some good. Only I suggest you take a more factual, logical approach.
February 21st, 2011 at 3:25 pm
Well, if you look at the ruling, the only reason it went to court is because they had a CBA which(according to Kraft, superceded the Fair Labor Act). We are not union so therefore, do not have a CBA.
March 3rd, 2011 at 7:24 pm
PO’d Safety Guy - I really don’t understand why you cast me and my fellow employees in such a negative light. Disgruntled? All I am asking for is that my workplace be fair, safe and equitable. Is that too much to ask for? I think the FLSA kind of covers that don’t you? Do a Google search and plug in “Doffing and Donning lawsuits”. There are a myriad of cases pending and some that have been settled. In court and out of court. There are a lot of police cases being litigated now. Are they all disgruntled?
I am way ahead of you on the attorney thing. I have contacted an attorney but am ambivalent about filing. So, I am looking at my options.
My advice to you is to look at this case unbiased. Apparently, you are in a management position and do not have to change your clothes WHEN you get to work. That is OK, but look at the other side. I have and that is why I am undecided even though I believe our chances of winning are good.
June 28th, 2011 at 11:18 am
I have worked in 2 different food plants over the last 11 years, one union, and one non. You have to understand the food production industry to even begin to comment on PPE, and required clothing. Both plants required standard uniforms, hairnets, steel toes, safety glasses and so on. No food plant will allow any of their PPE to leave the property, and for good reason. Any contamination of product could devastate the facility permanently. Workers cannot dress out at home before they come to work, and cannot go home after their shift wearing company PPE. Both of these companies and 13 of their sister facilities allowed 10 minutes on the clock to dress and or change into street clothes. Do the math, if you had to donate 20 minutes a day (10 up front & 10 on the end) times 5 days, that equals an hour and 40 minutes. The company did the math and concluded that it was a savings not to take the chance of contaminated product! By the way, one company is second largest manufacturer in North America. Had nothing to do with unions!
July 14th, 2011 at 2:29 pm
I have worked in the food industry for the past 12 years. Eleven of those years was as a manager, the past year has been as a non-exempt employee. I worked for Campbell Soup and Coca Cola as a manager and in both cases we expected the employee to be in uniform at the beginning of their scheduled start time, however we gave them 15 minutes at the end of their shift to get back into their street clothes, take a shower, clean up themselves from the day. The thought process behind this was a compromise of both food safety and employee safety. We needed the employees to be in a clean, sanitary uniform to handle the food but we also felt it was our responsibility to the employee and their families to not have them take home the dirt and filth from the manufacturing process. This also sent a message to the employees that we cared, because we did.
July 14th, 2011 at 2:42 pm
My current situation was brought on after a relocation for my wife’s career which landed me a position in a bakery as a non-exempt employee working in equipment maintenance. We are expected to be dressed in our proper PPE and ready to punch in at our scheduled start time. Then at the end of our shift we are expected to punch the clock then put our tools away, lock up, clean ourselves up and change back into street clothes. Before shift takes a minimum of 10 minutes and after the shift it is up to 20 minutes depending on how much dirt and filth I want to get in my car and take home to my family. I believe it is the employees responsibility to report to work able to work, which presumably the Kraft employees do, just as the banker comes to work in his suit and tie. The banker is not required to wear a suit and tie, it is an expected dress code and he/she is able to get dressed only once, at home. Food workers must get dressed twice once at home, once at work. Food For Thought!
July 15th, 2011 at 7:51 am
What scares me is these folks who work in food processing have to shower at the end of a shift so they won’t “take home the dirt and filth from the manufacturing process.” That doesn’t give me a lot of confidence that what we eat is safe to eat.