October Term 2014 · Docket 13-433

Must employers pay warehouse workers for security screenings?

Warehouse workers seek pay for mandatory security checks. Employers argue these checks are non-compensable.

Official caption
Integrity Staffing Solutions, Inc. v. Busk
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Argued
Sources analyzed through
Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  2. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    Clement argued security checks are non-compensable.

    Thierman argued security checks are principal activities.

    questions_asked_by_justices

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

This case tests the definition of compensable work. The dispute centers on security screenings.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on October 8, 2014.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

Employers want to exclude security checks from pay.

Workers want to receive pay for security checks.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

Employers argue security checks are non-compensable postliminary activities.

Workers argue security checks are principal activities.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Kagan asked about theft-prevention processes.

Justice Kennedy asked about hypothetical checkout times.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This case defines the scope of paid work. It affects millions of hourly workers nationwide.

Official sources for this section

What happens next

This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.

Official sources for this section

Official Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON