View Single Post
Old 12-11-2014, 11:22 AM   #39
pwalker8
Grand Sorcerer
pwalker8 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pwalker8 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pwalker8 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pwalker8 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pwalker8 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pwalker8 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pwalker8 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pwalker8 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pwalker8 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pwalker8 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pwalker8 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 7,196
Karma: 70314280
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Atlanta, GA
Device: iPad Pro, iPad mini, Kobo Aura, Amazon paperwhite, Sony PRS-T2
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcentros View Post
No. What a vapid, straw man argument. No one is arguing that they should be paid for time going to work and back. It's time "held in custody" for the screenings, while still on the jobsite that they should be paid for. Prosecute the thieves, don't punish everyone for their wrongdoing.

Should Amazon be able to require 2 hour employee meetings every week, off the clock?
It's not a straw man argument. The point is where do you draw the line? The argument about whither or not Amazon should have such security measures in place is a different argument or discussion. (Personally, I wouldn't want to work for such a company).

According to the line drawn by the law (i.e. work related tasks) a 2 hour employee meeting would be on the clock. In this specific case, I think that anyone who exits that area, be they employee or not, has to go through the security check point, thus it's not actually work related.
pwalker8 is offline   Reply With Quote