Target workers in New Jersey accept $4.6M to settle wage claims for off-the-clock walking

Summary

A class of current and former Target warehouse employees in New Jersey have agreed to accept a $4.6 million settlement to resolve state-law claims that Target failed to pay workers for time spent walking to and from their stations to undergo mandatory pre- and post-shift security screenings. The parties reached the settlement in June; it now awaits court approval. Target denies the allegations that the walking time was compensable.

Key Points

The settlement covers hourly, non-exempt warehouse workers at three Target distribution centres in New Jersey who alleged they weren’t paid for long walks required for security screenings before clocking in and after clocking out.
Plaintiffs argued this walking time should count as “hours worked” under New Jersey law, resulting in unpaid minimum wage and/or overtime pay.
Target disputes the claim that the walking was compensable; litigation on similar claims is ongoing in New York.
The dispute highlights how state laws can provide broader protections than the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), which the U.S. Supreme Court has limited in past rulings on pre- and post-shift activities.
Employers should note contrasting outcomes in other states (for example, California rulings and settlements have treated similar security checks as compensable time).

Content Summary

The named plaintiff worked at a Bridgeport warehouse. She and others said employees must show ID at the entrance, undergo mandatory screenings and walk long distances to their workstations before they may clock in. After shifts they must clock out, walk back to the entrance and be screened again before leaving. The complaint alleges Target violated the New Jersey Wage and Hour Law by not treating that walking as compensable time. Target has moved to dismiss similar New York claims, arguing state law there incorporates FLSA standards that exclude preliminary and postliminary walking time. The case underscores the question employers face about when pre- and post-shift activities are “integral and indispensable” and therefore payable under varying state laws.

Context and Relevance

This is part of a broader pattern of legal challenges over off-the-clock security checks and walking time in large fulfilment and distribution operations. The outcome (and settlements) vary by state because state wage and hour definitions can be broader than federal law. For HR, operations and payroll teams, this case is a reminder to review timekeeping policies, on-site security procedures and how travel within facilities is recorded and compensated. It also signals continuing litigation risk for retailers and logistics employers with sprawling warehouse footprints.

Author style

Punchy: This isn’t just a claim about unpaid minutes — it’s a multi-million-pound reminder that state law differences matter. If you run operations, payroll or compliance, this warrants immediate attention.

Why should I read this

Short version: if you manage warehouses, payroll or HR compliance, you’ll want to know how small bits of unpaid time can add up to big liabilities. Saves you the time of digging through the court filings — check your security-screening and clock-in practices now before they cost you.