Background
Lisa Johnson and Gale Miller Anderson worked as hourly warehouse employees for Amazon during the COVID-19 pandemic. Amazon required them to undergo mandatory pre-shift COVID-19 screenings lasting 10 to 15 minutes before they could clock in to their shifts. Because employees received no pay until clocking in, this screening time was uncompensated—amounting to roughly one hour per week of unpaid work.
In 2023, Plaintiffs brought a class action lawsuit seeking overtime compensation for this uncompensated screening time under the Illinois Minimum Wage Law (IMWL), which requires employers to pay time-and-a-half for all hours worked in excess of 40 per workweek. Amazon moved to dismiss, arguing that the federal Portal-to-Portal Act (PPA) exempts “preliminary activities” from compensation, and that the IMWL incorporates this federal exclusion. The district court agreed and dismissed the claim.
The Court’s Holding
The Seventh Circuit certified a question to the Illinois Supreme Court: whether the IMWL incorporates the PPA’s exclusion for preliminary activities. The Illinois Supreme Court answered definitively in the negative. Finding no mention of the PPA or preliminary activities anywhere in the IMWL’s text, and noting that Illinois Department of Labor regulations define “hours worked” as all time an employee is required to be on the employer’s premises, the court concluded the IMWL operates independently of federal preliminary-activity limitations.
Applying this guidance, the Seventh Circuit reversed the dismissal and rejected Amazon’s alternative argument that the screenings were not compensable because they were not “primarily for the benefit of the employer.” The court found no basis in the plain text of the IMWL or its implementing regulations for importing this “benefit of the employer” test. IDOL had deliberately included that test only in specific, limited contexts (meal periods, on-call time, and travel)—its omission from the general definition of “hours worked” suggested intentional exclusion. The court declined to read limitations into the statute that the Illinois legislature did not express.
Key Takeaways
- State wage laws need not incorporate federal limitations on compensable work, even when federal law provides narrower protections than state law.
- Pre-shift mandatory screenings or activities performed on the employer’s premises under the employer’s control are likely compensable time under the IMWL.
- Courts will not read the “benefit of the employer” test or other federal limitations into state wage statutes absent explicit statutory language requiring such incorporation.
- Illinois Department of Labor regulations define “hours worked” broadly to include all time employees are required to be on the employer’s premises, limiting exceptions to those explicitly stated in the regulations.
Why It Matters
This decision strengthens employee protections under state wage laws and clarifies a crucial principle: states are free to afford more generous wage-and-hour protections than federal law mandates, and courts will not read federal limitations into state statutes. For employers and workers alike, the holding has significant implications for any mandatory pre-shift activity—including health screenings, security checks, equipment inspections, or safety briefings—that occurs before employees clock in or at locations where they cannot leave the premises.
The decision underscores that when evaluating wage claims under state law, courts should look first to the plain language and intent of the state statute and its implementing regulations, rather than defaulting to federal analogues. This approach protects state labor law as an independent source of worker protections and may incentivize states to enact more detailed wage statutes to prevent federal law from filling interpretive gaps.