A Malvern, PA Telemarketing Company that publishes business newsletters must pay $1.75 million to thousands of employees who it forced to clock out while going to the bathroom, as well as when taking other short breaks. The federal judge who ordered the payment cited Labor Department regulations and pronouncements promoting the value of short breaks and the necessity that they be paid.
6,000 employees who worked at offices in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Ohio between 2009 and 2013 will receive the missed potty payments. This will include back pay and “damages”. I am not sure what the damages were, unless those go to the people who refused to go to the bathroom lest they lose some pay. That action might break something somewhere inside, I'm sure. I'm not sure what happened after 2013. Perhaps no one there has gone the bathroom in the past 3 years.
According to the Philadelphia Enquirer:
In July 2009, the company issued a written policy saying that workers could take “personal breaks at any time for any reason,” but that those breaks would not be paid.
The company had argued that federal law did not require it to pay employees for short breaks because the employees were completely relieved from duty and could do what they wanted during break time.
It appears the linchpin in this case was the fact that these employees were minimum wage workers. The Department of Labor maintained that by failing to pay these employees for break times they were not meeting the federal minimum wage standards.
Oops.
The company probably had some alternatives that would've avoided this whole stinky mess. They could have installed pay toilets, for instance. This “Pay for Poo” program would allow them to see an immediate return on their toidy time investment. Adult diapers might also have been a viable option. Of course, this would not help them with other types of short breaks, like smoking, illicit love trysts in the copy room, or running down the street for an interview with a better employer.
Unless, of course they decreed that ALL breaks must be taken in the pay toilets. Could get crowded in there – and the job interviews would be very awkward.
I should note that the Enquirer tells us that this business has 14 locations employing 700 people. Yet, we notice the settlement is to be paid to 6,000 employees who worked there between 2009 and 2013; just 5 years or so. As regular readers know, I am no cipherin' wizard, but that means they are looking at upwards of 175% turnover every year. Seems to me that burn rate would be a tad more costly than just letting people tinkle on the clock. But what do I know?
The judge has given the U.S. Department of Labor and the company until Thursday to submit proposals on managing payment. Considering the number of employees with varied and relatively short employment spans that will not be an easy task. This should serve as a valuable lesson to us all that we should just pay for our employees to pee, or they might just end up wetting on our parade.