Mitchell v. JCG Industries
929 F. Supp. 2d 827
N.D. Ill.2013Background
- Mitchell and Veasley worked as poultry line workers for JCG and Koch at the Berteau facility in Chicago; they were hired at $7.75 per hour with 8.5-hour shifts including a 0.5-hour unpaid meal break.
- Plaintiffs were required to don and doff lab jackets, aprons, gloves, ear plugs, sleeves, guards, and a hairnet before the line started and after it ended; donning/doffing allegedly took 10–15 minutes.
- Defendants allegedly required clocking in 15 minutes before shifts and paid only for line time, not donning/doffing time.
- Plaintiffs’ meal breaks were unpaid 30-minute periods during which they allegedly had to doff and wash equipment; some hand-washing occurred during the break.
- Plaintiffs’ claims were brought as a putative class under the IMWL for donning/doffing (Count I) and as an individual FLSA claim (Count II) for the same time, with assertions about walking time and § 203(o) applicability.
- Two CBAs—2007 (JCG and Union) and 2011 (Production Workers Union Local 707 and JCG)—expressly stated that donning/doffing would not be compensated; the 2007 CBA provides that donning/doffing is not compensated unless the Company decides otherwise.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether IMWL requires donning/doffing compensation when a CBA excludes it | Mitchell/Veasley—IMWL covers all hours worked regardless of CBA language | Koch/JCG—IMWL silent on donning/doffing; CBA exclusion controls | Summary judgment for defendants; donning/doffing excluded by CBA and not required by IMWL |
| Whether FLSA § 203(o) permits excluding donning/doffing from hours worked | § 203(o) does not force compensation for donning/doffing under IMWL | FLSA § 203(o) allows exclusion by CBA; applies to both IMWL and FLSA interpretations | Summary judgment for defendants; § 203(o) supports exclusion via CBA |
| Whether walking time between changing area and work area is compensable | Walking time may be compensable as part of principal activities | Walking time not compensable when CBAs exclude donning/doffing; Sandifer controls | Walking time claim rejected under Sandifer; not compensable under current CBAs |
| Whether meal-time donning/doffing claims survive under meal-period noncompensation rules | Meal-time donning/doffing could be compensable if not bona fide meal period | Meal periods are bona fide and noncompensable under Seventh Circuit and Sepulveda line | Meal-time claims noncompensable as Bona fide meal period; dismissed |
Key Cases Cited
- Spoerle v. Kraft Foods Global, Inc., 614 F.3d 427 (7th Cir. 2010) ( § 203(o) excludes donning/doffing from hours worked; clothes include safety gear)
- Sandifer v. U.S. Steel Corp., 678 F.3d 590 (7th Cir. 2012) (CBAs excluding donning/doffing bar as principal activity; walking time rejected)
- Sepulveda v. Allen Family Foods, Inc., 591 F.3d 209 (4th Cir. 2009) (meal-period donning/doffing treated as nonworking bona fide meal period)
- Urnikis-Negro v. American Family Prop. Servs., 616 F.3d 665 (7th Cir. 2010) (Illinois wage law parallels FLSA interpretations; guides applying wage claims)
- Lewis v. Giordano's Enters., 397 Ill.App.3d 581, 336 N.E.2d 740 (Ill.App. 2009) (IMWL guidance via analogous FLSA interpretations)
- Turner v. The Saloon, Ltd., 595 F.3d 679 (7th Cir. 2010) (coextensivity of wage-related protections; relevance to wage claims)
- Bernardi v. Village of North Pekin, 135 Ill.App.3d 589, 90 Ill.Dec. 394, 482 N.E.2d 101 (Ill.App. Ct. 1985) (employer-employee compensation through wage-related statutes in Illinois)