Washington - Q: I have a family member who works at a
large suburban office building. For more than 30 years, the employer has
provided free parking at this location. Because of a recent increase in the
number of employees and customers at this building, the company is shifting
employee parking to a free off-site garage nearly a mile away. Since the area
is not pedestrian-friendly, a shuttle will be provided. The entire process will
add 30 minutes of travel time each day.
Is the employer required to pay the employees for the
extra 2.5 hours of time being added to their workweek?
A: Call me Pollyanna, but I see a few causes for
celebration here: One, it sounds like the business is growing, and two, the
employer is at least trying to offset the hazard and inconvenience with a free
shuttle. And even in the suburbs, free parking is nothing to sneer at. Yay ...?
If you prefer your comfort served cold, your relative is
in good company: Commute times throughout the United States have been steadily
increasing since 2010, to a national average of 26 minutes each way. (Pause
here for bitter laughter from "extreme commuters," the
fastest-growing group, who travel 90 minutes or more each way to jobs in
pricey, traffic-choked metropolitan areas.)
Now the bad news: Standard travel time between home and
the workplace is generally not considered compensable work time under the Fair Labour
Standards Act. If you choose to live farther from work - or you simply can't
afford any square footage bigger than a breadbox in your employer's vicinity -
a longer commute is your burden to bear. But even though your relative's
increased commute time is due to the employer's business decision, the employer
isn't obligated to pay for that added time, any more than if the employer had
moved to a new location.
Read also: Porsche wants a 911 to find parking in tech pursuit
The story might be different if employees are required to
start working the moment they board the shuttle - say, if the employer equips
the bus with WiFi so employees can send emails in transit, says employment
attorney Declan Leonard of business law firm Berenzweig Leonard. Also, Leonard
points out, some states may have a more expansive view of what commute time
qualifies for pay. For example, the California Supreme Court in 2000 ruled that
agricultural employees who were required to meet in a specific location and
board an employer-provided bus to the work site were entitled to receive pay
for the time they spent riding the bus, because they were "subject to the
control of the employer" during that ride.
But it doesn't sound as though your relative is being
forced to drive to the parking lot and take the shuttle. Presumably, employees
are free to use any option - bike, carpool, pogo stick, atomic matter
transporter - that gets them to the office door. Or, if pay parking is
available closer to work, they may decide a day's parking fee is an acceptable
trade-off for their time.
WASHINGTON POST