Vedder is an international business-focused law firm serving sophisticated clients of all sizes and industries from offices across the U.S. and in the UK and Asia.

A Business Focused Law Firm With a Global Reach | Vedder

On March 19, 2026, the Illinois Supreme Court issued a highly anticipated decision in Lisa Johnson v. Amazon.com Services, LLC, clarifying that nonexempt employees must be compensated for time spent completing pre-shift COVID-19 screenings, and other “preliminary” and “postliminary” activities under the Illinois Minimum Wage Law (IMWL). This marks a significant departure from the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), which as amended by Section 254 of the Portal-to-Portal Act (PPA), excludes from an employee’s compensable time preliminary and postliminary activities—i.e., activities that occur before or after tasks that are an “integral and indispensable” part of the employee’s principal work.

core/paragraph

Lisa Johnson, a former Amazon.com Services LLC (Company) employee, filed a putative class action in Illinois state court alleging that the Company violated the FLSA and the IMWL by failing to pay its nonexempt employees overtime arising out of mandatory, pre-shift COVID-19 screenings. Johnson alleged that the screening time was compensable because employees were required to be on Company premises, the screenings were necessary for their work, and the primary purpose of the screenings was to keep the Company’s fulfillment centers operational.

After removing the case to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, the Company moved to dismiss the complaint on the ground that the COVID-19 screening time was not compensable under the PPA. The district court granted the motion, dismissing Johnson’s FLSA claim because the COVID-19 screening time was not compensable. The court also dismissed the IMWL claim on the ground that the IMWL incorporated the PPA’s exclusion of preliminary and postliminary activities from compensable time.

Johnson appealed the dismissal of her IMWL claim and asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit to certify to the Illinois Supreme Court the question of whether the IMWL incorporates the PPA’s exclusion of preliminary and postliminary activities from employees’ compensable time. The Seventh Circuit noted that both sides had plausible arguments on the issue and certified the proposed question.

The Illinois Supreme Court ruled in favor of Johnson, and held that the IMWL does not include an exception for preliminary and postliminary activities as set forth in the PPA. Such time must be included in determining overtime compensation owed to nonexempt employees.

The Court examined Section 4a of the IMWL, 820 ILCS 105/4a, which provides for a general right to overtime except for ten specific exceptions. The Court noted that while four of the exceptions reference the FLSA, none mentions the PPA or preliminary or postliminary activities, thus demonstrating an intentional decision by the Illinois legislature not to incorporate the PPA’s exclusions.

The Court also reviewed the regulations underlying the IMWL, 56 Ill. Admin. Code 210.110, which define “hours worked” as “all the time an employee is required to be on duty, or on the employer’s premises or at other prescribed places of work, and any additional time the employee is required or permitted to work for the employer.” Notably, Section 210.110 makes no reference to the PPA or the U.S. Department of Labor (USDOL) regulations excluding preliminary or postliminary activities from compensation. Rather, “hours worked,” as defined in the IMWL, includes all time the employee is required to be on the employer’s premises, which is inconsistent with the application of the PPA exclusion.

Additionally, the Court examined another section of the regulations, 56 Ill. Admin. Code 210.120, which allows the Director of the Illinois Department of Labor (IDOL) to refer to USDOL regulations and interpretations of the FLSA for guidance in interpreting the IMWL. Although this section has been read to support the general proposition that courts should look to federal law and regulations to interpret the scope and meaning of the IMWL, the Court noted that Section 210.120 does not require the IDOL to adopt provisions of the FLSA or provide that USDOL regulations can override the IDOL’s own definition of “hours worked.”

Following the Illinois Supreme Court’s ruling, employers in Illinois should review their timekeeping and pay practices to ensure that employees are being properly paid for all required time. The Johnson decision makes clear that time employers may have previously disregarded is now compensable under Illinois (and other states’) law, even if excluded as preliminary or postliminary under federal law.

We will continue to track developments in this developing area of law.

Illinois Supreme Court Holds That Preliminary and Postliminary Activities Must Be Paid

Related Capabilities

Related People

Stay up to date

Related Capabilities

Related People

Stay up to date

Slide Menu

Slide Search