Ex-Apple bods suing Apple for bag searches get class-action upgrade Two former Apple Store staffers suing Apple for searching their bags at work for possible stolen gear have upgraded their legal challenge to a wide-ranging class-action lawsuit. Judge William Alsup approved the class-action status in California's northern district court in San Francisco on Thursday. It means the lawsuit, …
@ silent_count: "If it's as quick as all that then what's the problem with doing these searches during the time the employees are paid to be there?"
Absolutely true.
But, also, still outrageous. If Apple can't trust any of their employees not to steal their stock, then they either (a) need to get better employees or (b) take a long hard look at themselves and work through their paranoia issues.
In either case, no need for constant bag checks. Sure, if stock goes missing at a particular store, investigate, but this is way over the line.
While I fully agree with anyone who says bag checks should be done on time paid for by the company, this is nonsense. In every place you will have black sheep. In places where black sheep can take your stuff away without being caught, they will take your stuff away. In a place like an Apple Store, where the average employee could take stuff worth more than a weekly wage every single day, this will very expensive.
But maybe you have a secret way unknown to anyone else that lets you detect which people would steal from your store and which people wouldn't. I am sure Apple, and every single retail store on either side of the Atlantic, and everywhere else, would really love to hear from you.
@Paw Bokenfohr
This is a self-correcting 'problem' (if one chooses to view it that way).
If enough customers are offended by Apple searching it's employee's bags, then Apple has the option to change the policy or lose customers and go out of business.
If enough prospective employees are offended by this policy then Apple will have trouble attracting staff, which means paying higher wages, which in turn means charging more for their products (to make enough to pay the higher wages) which will make their products less attractive to customers.
Regardless of what Apple fans might say, the more they charge for products the more potential customers will decide that a similar Samsung, HTC, or possibly even WinPhone is good enough.
> Used to work at Apple Ireland - leaving work there was often a long delay due to the fact anyone who had a bag with them had to show a security guard there was nothing in it - quite annoying and insulting
You may want to run this through your local ombudsman (or a lawyer, if you're so inclined), because in those jurisdictions where I bothered to check this out (Ireland isn't one of them), someone's property can only be searched by a duly authorised person such as police and only in those cases contemplated by the law (massive simplification, you get the idea I hope).
Before someone brings it up, no, making this a condition of employment is not sufficient, insofar as you cannot force your employees to give up the personal rights granted to them by your country's laws. Besides, it's as simple as providing a set of lockers at the entrance of the store where you can be asked to leave your bags.
I bothered with this in a different context, but your case seems applicable too.
Nonsense. Most retail chains in America search employees on the way out. It's already been tested in court and no, employers do not have to pay employees for this brief inconvenience, any more than they have to pay them to walk from their cars in the parking lot to their workplace.
"Nonsense. Most retail chains in America search employees on the way out. It's already been tested in court and no, employers do not have to pay employees for this brief inconvenience, any more than they have to pay them to walk from their cars in the parking lot to their workplace."
Happily, your cozy vision of a gulag where workers are a speculum and flashlight away from being turned inside-out is about to be tested. Just because one regressive ruling has given US employers totalitarian power doesn't mean it will stand forever.
Well, you're talking about the Corporate States of America.
Sure, in the stinky old Oligarchy, you'd be correct, but this guy was talking about Ireland, where there are actual laws and not just a puppet theater on TV.
You know, thankfully, not the entire world has fallen to the USA yet. Ok, so the Apaches, the Kiowa, the Hopies and numerous others have fallen as you took over their land, and sure, whoever else you attack is screwed, but Ireland is still intact.
I guess your murderous army will be on their way there soon.
I'd have to check on Ireland specifics but in the UK only the police can force you to do this. You're employer can ask you, and you can refuse. However this may put you in breach of your employment contract and be used as grounds for dismissal.
If you have 'given consent' when signing your employment contract you are still able to withdraw that consent at anytime. If someone were to man-handle you at this point they run the risk of committing assault etc. if someone has withdrawn consent to search and there are reasonable grounds for suspicion then calling the police is the next obvious step.
A lot of places have the right to search in the site rules.
These give the company the right to search your bag. In the UK this is legal as long as the site rules are available and there are signs displayed indicating right to search will be used.
Using it everyday for everybody may be considered excessive in a court but probably not illegal.
In some cases you can be asked to empty your pockets as well.
IANAL YMMV etc etc
I used to work in a shop and we had random searches. However we were payed for the time we were in work, so if it took 30 minutes to get through everyone we had an extra 30 minutes pay. This isn't about the searches being illegal, it is about not being compensated correctly for your time in work.
Having just completed a project with a major UK based supermarket I saw this first hand. It was part of peoples contact - failure to allow a search (bag or vehicle) 'might' result in disciplinary action. Searches were random, but were on paid time. They were seen as a deterrent by the security team (with whom I worked for part of the project) and not an all encompassing filter.
> It is legal???
That is a question with no absolute answers. Having said that, if your country has signed the European Convention on Human Rights, it is bound to have legislation that seeks to protect your privacy, emanating from their obligations under (from memory) article 8 of the convention (do note that the convention itself applies to States, not to persons, whether they be legal or physical, so it's not the convention itself that protects you--not in a direct manner at least).
> So what happens if you refuse??
People will try to get into an argument and say all kinds of nonsense. At which point you just call the police and ask the other party to expound their arguments again, for the record. Then, either people back off and let it go, or they are advised by the police that should they persist in their intent they may be committing an offence. A follow-up letter to the head of the organisation concerned, in which you or a solicitor friend explain your reservations, more often than not leads to an apology and a change of policy.
That is my experience.
And remember: always be firm but polite. Stick to facts and do not get into arguments. Treat everyone with respect.
EVERY end-customer in the chemical, petrochemical and petroleum industry I've ever worked for in the last 30 years reserves the right to check anyone leaving the plant. Spot checks are carried out on a regular basis during the day, and every so-often someone is stupid enough to nock some nuts and bolts, tools, electrical equipment and other odds and ends. It is a fact of life.
This requirement is communicated to anyone entering the facility, and it is also advertised on signs when you enter. If you disagree with this policy you have the choice of remaining outside.
I have never heard of anyone sueing on this basis. Am I missing something ?
I must however admit that being searched several hours a day for 15 or 20 minutes sounds quite disturbing. Or were they just waiting for their turn to be searched ? Which sounds equally bizarre.
> I have never heard of anyone sueing on this basis. Am I missing something ?
In a different context, but I have pursued this. I have so far found myself unable to get the other parties to go to court or effect retribution following my consistent refusal to submit to such searches, on grounds that there simply isn't a law that gives any random physical or legal person the right to go through your belongings at their leisure. In fact, there are explicit restrictions *against* that in order to protect a number of important personal rights, notably that to a private life.
Those notices, contract clauses, etc., are not supported by any laws that I'm aware of in those places where I've taken the trouble to investigate, which however does not include the UK or Ireland. You could in the same contract have a clause giving your employer the custody of your first born and carnal rights to your wife and sisters. It would be just as valid, i.e., not valid at all.
As I said above, the concerned companies and entities have at their disposal a number of other, quite legal, ways to protect their interests, such as restricting what and who can go into sensitive areas.
Like mentioned in a Win 10 article the other day where a company expects the employees to be in work 15 minutes early in order to turn on their aging PC in order to 'start' work on time, but only paying them for the working hours. I had a manager at a previous employers suggest that to me when I'd arrive about 2 minutes to start - I suggested they replace the machines with faster ones or schedule some version of a wake-on-lan system to get them booting up ready for my arrival for the time they started to pay me. Eventually we opted for the simplest of all solutions - arrange for one team member to start work 15 minutes early and run round all the team computers and turn them on, then work on other tasks which didn't require a PC.
You keep repeating that like a parrot.
If EVERYBODY does it and the devil too, that has no bearing on legality, morality or who must pay for the time.
Corporate America will do whatever they can get away with.
Crapple has refused warranty to customers in New York, cause they were outside while there was Frost! In Winter... can you imagine, people would still go outside when there's frost? And expecting to be able to take their cell phone along?
Crazy people... buying egotistical products i-this and i-that
Just boycott Crapple, Greedle and Shitsung - buy HTC and Sony instead - but only for a while, until they get too cocky too, then switch to the next underdog.
I used to work for Staples here in Canada. Bag checks anytime you wanted to leave the store. Want to go for lunch? Bag check. Want to go home? Bag check.
All too often I would be waiting for a manager on duty to come search my bag and I would be clocked out and then a customer would see me and ask for help further delaying me from leaving the store. Looking back on it...my feelings are kinda mixed about it. My managers there at that store were a really good bunch if people that would bend over backwards for a good employee so I didn't mind the extra time or waiting that much.
But I have to agree with the staff that it can really make you feel like the company as a whole doesn't trust you at all.
On the flip side it served as a protection to me as the employee. If something went missing out of the store I was above suspicion.
Bottom line...feels neither here nor there.
I worked at a PC World in the mid nineties and this was standard practice. If you nipped out for a ciggy you were searched, but that was obviously in company time. The search at the end of the shift was always in your own time as you were expected to be working right up to the bell. Mind you, customers leaving with trolleys that had PCs or anything looking remotely expensive also had their receipts checked against what was on their trolley.
Then again, hardware crime was in fashion at the time. This was when offices were being burgled for the CPUs and RAM, with the rest of the computer being left behind.
I believe in the states they have no right to search a customer or even to demand to see the receipt. At Frys they always accosted me at the door asking to see the receipt and look in the bag - I politely tell them good day, and walk right by without complying. Nothing untoward has ever happened to me.
I've worked at places where there was a 'random' system for bag checks, press a button and it flashes green or red, get a red light and you get a bag search. I've worked in other places where everyone got searched on the way in and out, full on arms in the air, sweep with a metal detector and a bag search.
Once I'd been through a check I realised the best way to get in and out of the building quickly was to leave my toolbag in the car and only carry in my laptop and tools I knew I'd need.
Why do people get so hellbent and filing a class action lawsuit for everything that is a requirement of their workplace?
Many businesses do bag checks on their employees when leaving the building. When I was studying for my master's at university they even checked us there.
My current employer does these checks to ensure no valuables from the workplace are stolen and no one here has a problem with it. Besides, the checks are like 20 seconds of each persons time then they're over. These bag checks actually prevented day visitors on one occasion from stealing over $10000 worth of printing equipment and laptops.
People need to stop being so petty and learn to deal with the small preventative steps taken by their employers to prevent losses of stock and valuable equipment. If it were my money at risk I'd also want to ensure I'm not flushing down the drain.
If companies wish to do this, then they also need to resource it appropriately. It may be reasonable to wait a couple of minutes, occasionally - but if this is 5-10 minutes every shift, and 20 minutes on a bad day, then no matter what the company policy is, its out of order.
In the UK, if you have caring responsibilities for a child, or a disabled person, you are legally entitled to inform your employer that you need to leave now to fulfil those responsibilities - even in the middle of a shift, and your employer cannot sanction you in any way.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
