The Second Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on October 13, 2026, that Lidl US, LLC must compensate employees for waiting time before their shifts begin. This decision affects Sandra Santos and other Lidl employees who have claimed unpaid wages for time spent waiting to enter their workplace before their scheduled shifts. The ruling clarifies the interpretation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) regarding compensable waiting time.
Sandra Santos, the plaintiff in the case (docket number 25-2357), had argued that she and her colleagues were required to report to work fifteen minutes before their shifts started but often had to wait for managers to unlock the store. This waiting time, according to Santos, should be compensated as it was required by the employer. The ruling is significant as it could impact how other employers handle similar situations.
Background
Sandra Santos worked as a store clerk and stocker at Lidl grocery stores from July to November 2021. She was scheduled for ten-hour shifts starting at 5:00 a.m. but was required to arrive at 4:45 a.m. to prepare for work. However, opening managers frequently arrived late, leaving Santos and her coworkers waiting outside until they could clock in. Santos claimed this unpaid waiting time amounted to wage theft and filed a lawsuit against Lidl in the Eastern District of New York.
The district court dismissed Santos's claims, ruling that the waiting time was non-compensable under the Portal-to-Portal Act, which generally protects employers from FLSA liability for time spent on preliminary or postliminary activities. Santos appealed, arguing that the court had misapplied the law regarding compensable waiting time.
The Ruling
The Second Circuit agreed with Santos, stating that waiting time can be compensable under the FLSA when an employer requires an employee to report to work at a specific time but prevents them from clocking in for reasons beyond their control. The court quoted from its opinion, saying, "Waiting time is compensable under the FLSA when an employer requires an employee to report to the worksite at a certain time to be ready to work and, for reasons beyond the employee’s control, there is no work to be done." The judges involved in the ruling included Circuit Judges Sullivan and Robinson, along with District Judge Rakoff sitting by designation.
The court vacated the dismissal of Santos's claims and remanded the case back to the district court for further proceedings. The ruling emphasizes that employers cannot evade responsibility for compensating employees for time they are required to be present but cannot work due to circumstances controlled by the employer.
Impact
This ruling is significant for employees who may be affected by similar practices in other workplaces. It sets a precedent that waiting time can be considered compensable when employees are required to be on-site and ready to work, but cannot clock in due to employer-related delays. This decision may encourage more employees to pursue claims for unpaid wages under similar circumstances, potentially leading to increased scrutiny of employer practices regarding employee compensation.
The outcome of this case could also influence how companies structure their opening procedures and timekeeping practices to ensure compliance with labor laws. Employers may need to reassess their policies to avoid potential wage claims from employees who are required to wait before starting their shifts.
What's Next
The case has been remanded to the district court for further proceedings. It is unclear if Lidl will appeal the decision to a higher court, but the ruling opens the door for Santos and potentially other employees to seek compensation for unpaid waiting time. There are no related cases currently pending that have been mentioned in the court filing.