Wage and hour focus article 1

Time and motion experts should work together with statisticians when performing time and motion studies

Case: MARIA CHAVEZ, et al., on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. IBP, INC. and TYSON FOODS, INC., all Delaware corporations, Washington, Eastern District, CV-01-5093-RHW, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29714

Punchline: Chavez v. IBP shows the importance of representativeness of a time and motion study used to measure time spent working of the clock. The plaintiffs' shadow study of time spent walking to and from job posts was disallowed and ruled to be unreliable because the study relied on non-representative walking observations

Background (from the court's order concerning the defendant's motion to decertify the class)This is a class action brought under the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), 29 U.S.C. §§ 201-219, as well as the Washington state Minimum Wage Act ("MWA"), RCW chapter 49.46.005 et seq., the Industrial Welfare Act, RCW chapter 49.12.005 et seq., and the Wages-Deductions-Contribution-Rebate Act, RCW chapter 49.52. The Court has jurisdiction over the class members' FLSA claims under 29 U.S.C. § 216(b) and 28 U.S.C. § 1331.

The named Plaintiffs, Maria Chavez, Ranulfo Gutierrez, Paz Arroyo, Antonio Martinez, and Silverio Diaz, were employed at the Tyson beef slaughter, processing, and hides divisions in Pasco, Washington (the "Pasco Plant") sometime after November 1, 1998. The Rule 23 class was defined in the Court's certification order as: All individuals performing production work in the Pasco plant processing, slaughter and hides division during any time between November 2, 1998 through May 14, 2002, excluding supervisors, managers, quality control employees, guards, mechanics, laundry room employees, janitors, knife room employees, and packaging department employees whose jobs are limited to work performed after the product has been bagged and boxed.

The class is comprised of 1,136 opt-in Plaintiffs bringing claims under the FLSA and Washington state law, and 3,909 Rule 23 Plaintiffs (including 116 FLSA opt-in Plaintiffs with state and federal claims and 2,797 Rule 23 Plaintiffs with only Washington state claims) (Ct. Rec. 633). At trial, 36 processing class members, 14 slaughter class members, and 3 hides class members testified. In total, approximately 5% of the opt-in class, and less than 1% of the opt-out class, testified. The class Plaintiffs seek damages for uncompensated work performed during the period commencing on November 2, 1998, and ending on December 31, 2003.

Expert's part and court opinion of time and motion expert's work:

In a previous case (Alvarez), Plaintiffs presented the testimony of Dr. Kenneth Mericle on the issue of amount of time employees spend walking from their lockers to the production room floor. Dr. Mericle calculated the Alvarez walking times by utilizing a standard rate of speed developed by industrial engineers. In the present action, Plaintiffs assert that the Alvarez walking calculations vastly underestimate the time actually spent walking, and present alternative times based on Dr. Mericle's shadowing study. Dr. Mericle concludes that the average pre-shift walking times for Slaughter are 1.822 minutes and for Processing are 2.622 minutes (Id.). These times include "walking segments from the locker, to the workstation and includes walking to clean glasses and obtain knives, sand paper and miscellaneous job related equipment but not walking for gloves." (Id.)

The Court finds that Dr. Mericle's new walking calculations include instances where employees unnecessarily backtracked or retraced their steps; therefore, they are not an accurate representation of walk time that is work. In addition, Dr. Mericle's walking calculation included a significant amount of walking to complete job activities that were unique to certain job categories. Therefore, the Court finds that Dr. Mericle's calculations did not provide representative evidence of the walking time expended by the class as a whole.

What could have been done: A more representative sample of walking observations could have yielded a more scientifically valid study and may have not been subject to the the same criticisms.