located in illinois which of course in the united states that's the last of annoy the fossil tide states why this is a nonunion plant that it's basically a line plant it's very body has to be on the line work the laws that we have before us have the end of protecting the worker not to the supper few for from the time the person enters into the were facility in the time to personally i had i suppose i would put a caveat of reasonable time required for doing whatever the person has to do federal cases any federal regulations that are based on and revive on the portal portal act are irrelevant for the illinois administrative code to i should say all rights whether for lunch or for any other reason the time they enter the time they leave and all activity concerning walking to the workplace and from and all activity concerning the putting on a quick now out in regards to that so on is just a minimalist because when you look at it say these people that and so i think fifteen dollars an hour your time over forty this time and a half but it just fifteen dollars an hour one minute of time before miss time this is a dollar for ministry time price a day is two dollars before going to time and a half sixty three dollars and five days a week so yes are you all those fellows that gets to the airport at the time that airport or the airline tells you to get there to make sure that your bags are checked and that your had to boarding gate you supposed to or you come a little bit with your hair net with you or do those in the car do those in the parking lot or do those at home office some people do things at the last minute some people do things well in advance some people wait till they get t change shoes being all loose seem to be to be debtors of individual choice rather than a blanket statement that all employees are going to handle at the same way well statistically appropriate cold her court and you do time studies and determine well yes he is a rough average and it's kind of like you know  certain be a basis of the decision here at this time because it's a factual driven question as to how much time is necessary and what activities are necessary to the person or protect the so we get around this they say well you get an unpaid fifteen minute break the trouble with craft thing here it's it's craft realize that applying federal regulations you gotta pay for a fifteen minute they could've made a thirty minute break or longer and said you were not going to pay to take that and i and why i have a good idea is to find work and you've got to keep that line moving but the fact of the matter is that pressed had to pay for that lunch break and had to pay for any other rights they could not say that something is twenty minutes or less under federal regulations they didn't have to pay for th state law you have to look at what is more faith with employees so i am saying that the federal government says what a break it's twenty minutes or less you've got to pay regardless of what the break how it's characterized how it's used and i'm saying that the state of illinois does require a twenty minute break but doesn't speak to whether that twenty minutes was so i think that when you consider the legislative purposes of this of the federal state federal legislation that the people work in title to a twenty minute period at least a twenty minute period craft could give them more of a twenty minute period could have made a thirty minute period and said we're not paying you past chose to make a twenty minute period and said they were going to pay and now they say well wait we're going to do an offset here them have thirty minute or more lunch breaks they do not even cite to the federal act i'm looking for  setting time in fact you're required to pay for the lunch period and say we're going to offset the lunch period against we were good or we're going to  asserting statutory wage claim under illinois state law no classes ever gotten certified or ever been certified in this matter all four plaintiffs were deposed and their admissions were taken to heart and rule to which mr phoebus is is with respect to real period production and there is a direct illinois law on that very point so while i think both parties are both sides would agree that you'll look to the fair labor standards act as amended and it's pieces for interpretive guidance of the illinois minimum wage law you first look to the illinois minimum wage law and its regulations to determine whether or not you need additional interpretive guide us in this respect with respect to the mill periods you do not under the illinois minimum wage fall on the one day of rest seven law they work together you cannot ignore one statute in favor of the other you are required by law employers are required by law to provide a twenty minutes he'll work under in one file c s one forty slash three every employer shall permit its employees who are to work for seven in us hours or longer except those present by in the section at least twenty minutes for a meal period beginning no later than five hours after the state start of the work area the regulations issued by the department of labor under that illinois state statute specifies that a violation of section three of the act shall be charged each work period that's the fun in section two two zero point eight hundred during during which an employee is not permitted a meal period of it least twenty minutes that's found in a minute illinois ministry of code section two zero point nine zero five you then turn to the definition of hours worked under the illinois minimum wage law at section two one zero point one one zero and it defines hours of work in the very second paragraph of that section to say and employees meal periods those meal periods that illinois state law requires employers to prop provided just talked about are compatible our work when such time is spent predominantly for the benefit of the employer i'm sorry for the employer what does it mean for the benefit of you well there is no record i believe before you asked to predominantly or what it means to be a benefit for the poor but well you see but not for this case but any sure i think the examples exist in the record when we have testimony from one of the name plaintiffs specifically identify that he is permitted to leave the facility he takes at least twenty minutes and many times longer and he goes to lombok is the case maybe in champagne to get a burrito and have his launch and enjoy his lunch i think when read the regulation witchcraft and when the department of exactly i think that's exactly what the ministry of regulation was getting at or as i judge joan illustrated below the circuit court decision and we were discussing this oral argument for example if somebody sat ham sandwich in their less must be again i would refer you to the complaint the amended complaint and the claims that have been a certain case they are pure illinois statutory law and to the extent that there is some differing question  regulation propounded by the department of labor as to yet tell us a versus a regulation and a statute proponent under illinois law i think we have to go with the illinois law we're here on illinois statutory cla would argue that for purposes of taking on the interpretive guidance that you should look to the federal department of labor regulations for purposes of interpretive guidance we don't need that interpretive guidance here because we have state labor standards that's the basis of her claim based upon twenty nine c of her seventy five point eight if they did we would be in federal court on or frankly we would have had this case removed in this case if they were asserting a claim under the fair labor standards act we would be before the federal court and there are multiple arguments why on in various circumstances a thirty minute lunch break is not required for various places so your position is not here your honor because we're dealing with an illinois statute in illinois claims and i was just i would state that the department of labor and the federal part of labor when it when it won't get it its regulations those were regulations with respect to the fair labor standards act and when the curtain a liberal illinois woman did it regulations those were regulations with respect to the illinois minimum wage law will the reason i mention that is because there are some  federal regulations for purposes of persuading how the illinois law should be interpreted and again i agree with mr that we must look to the fair labor standards act as it's amended for interpretive guidance on the illinois law in those areas we are the reason for the guidance that is necessary but on this but the amount of time associated with the millbrae claim there is no interpret guidance necessary on that question that point has been  we have had no briefing and no decision on classification today so it's presently just four named players and if they have no claim as the circuit court below said then we have no class action we have problem and it's not a problem for this reason the plaintiffs in this case the four individuals are actually on site for eight hours and fifteen minutes when they're onsite and get paid as you noted for it out they actually work only seven hours and thirty minutes they have forty five minutes worth of break and lunch time as specified policy the one which is the break in once policy which is part of the record from below is found at  eight of the minutes are paid and fifteen are on pay twenty minutes are also afforded of those forty five for a lunch or meal period because the illinois law specifies that a meal period need not be compensated then we have them if you want to argue that they are meeting to be compensated for the break time that's not a meal here if you have the name points present for seven hours and fifty five minutes but receiving compensation for granted other employees none of which are present here on site mechanics and distribution employees for eight hours and receive eight hours of compensation they receive thirty minutes of break and lunch time so fifteen break except for five minutes whereas the employees they're there for the entire eight hours get paid for twenty minutes of their lunch break that's accurate ok well is that a problem then the third treated differently words but you don't get paid for it's not a problem and again i would i would point to two reasons one is the the employees who are there for eight hours and get paid for lunch don't get paid for second respray the employees who are there for eight hours and fifteen minutes do get paid for a second press break the only time that such a dichotomy would create a problem his him it was created on an impermissible basis for example if all of the mechanics and distribution employees were women or african americans and they're being treated differently based on an immutable characteristic that would create a problem i'm going to put necessarily illinois minimum wage law but under nondiscrimination laws and that's not the case or an employer c treat employees in varying fashions for example many employees and craft get one wage while another set of employees are crap get paid higher we have differences created between classifications believe the four name has received compensation somewhere between twelve and fifteen or twelve and sixteen dollars an hour in any event that's not relevant to the issue for the sport whether it was twelve dollars an opinion says these consolidated cases raise questions concerning the coverage of the fair labor standards act nine hundred thirty eight l s a as amended by the portal or lack of one nine hundred forty seven with   department of labor adopted the ministry of code section two one zero stop one two zero direct thing anybody who is in trip or day the illinois minimum wage to look to the fair labor standard justice next you had a question and i think a very poignant one with respect to what is reasonable for a rival yet you like dots the position for order to be taken by the plaintiffs in this case that you typical in that regard is because you know it well would be reasonable for one person to show up at the plant a second before their shift starts might be reasonable to him or her were asked for another employee to show up to the plant they may want twenty or thirty minutes to get ready before they work they may want to relax the main wish to read the paper i want to compensate all persons for all twenty thirty forty minutes from whence they crossed the threshold of the property as the planets would you believe to get around that mr eavis suggests that we could have the employer conduct the statistical study and in analysis by the plaintiff's reading of the illinois minimum wage laws then every illinois employer must employ a statistician or an expert to first conduct an analysis to determine what may or may not be reasonable for periods of time when they cross the brush your time there's no reference there part of the claim being brought under federal tort the claim about under thank you under the ellen oil wage payment collection act any wage claim can be brought that's so you can be voted under federal regulation but it can be collected under the wage payment and collection act well why wouldn't  two ten one ten it says and employers and employees mean all periods and then it has an end time spent on call away from his her sl employer's premises are compensable hours work which when when such time is predominately for the benefit well a predominately for the benefit i believe only applies to the time away from the meal periods and should look to the required to comply with federal law in making their payments and that's why we can bring a claim against him under the only way to a collection but shriners have other questions