Illinois Supreme Court Broadens Scope of Compensable Work Time Under State Law

Illinois employers should take note that compliance with federal wage-and-hour law alone is no longer sufficient to assess compensable time obligations in the state.  In a recent decision, the Illinois Supreme Court clarified that Illinois law does not adopt federal limitations on compensable work time.  As a result, the decision expands what may qualify as “hours worked” under Illinois law and potentially broadens employer exposure to off-the-clock claims.

The Facts and the Decision

On March 19, 2026, the Illinois Supreme Court issued a ruling in Johnson v. Amazon.com Services LLC, addressing whether the Illinois Minimum Wage Law (“IMWL”) incorporates the federal Portal-to-Portal Act’s exclusions for “preliminary” and “postliminary” activities.  The case arose from claims by warehouse employees who were required to undergo daily COVID-19 screenings prior to clocking in.  The screenings took approximately 10–15 minutes per shift and were mandatory for entry into the workplace.  While these claims were dismissed under federal law, the Illinois Supreme Court allowed the claims to proceed under the IMWL, opening the door to potential recovery under state law.

The Court held that the plain language of the IMWL does not incorporate the federal Portal-to-Portal Act’s exclusions.  Rather than borrowing federal standards, the Court emphasized that the IMWL must be interpreted based on its own statutory language and Illinois Department of Labor guidance, signaling a clear departure from long-standing reliance on federal law as the default framework.

What Changed

Under federal law, certain pre- and post-shift activities, such as screenings, security checks, or preparatory tasks, are often excluded from compensable time unless they are “integral and indispensable” to the employee’s principal duties.  The Illinois Supreme Court rejected importing that framework into state law and held that time spent performing employer-required activities before or after a shift may be compensable under Illinois law, even if it would not be compensable under federal law.

Consistent with this approach, the Illinois Department of Labor defines “hours worked” broadly 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.  Accordingly, the key inquiry will focus on whether the activity is required and whether it occurs under the employer’s control.

Increased Litigation Risk

This ruling is likely to fuel additional litigation, especially for employers with:

• Controlled access worksites (e.g., warehouses, distribution centers, manufacturing facilities)
• Mandatory safety, security, or compliance protocols
• Roles requiring pre-shift technical setup or preparation

Importantly, compliance with the Fair Labor Standards Act alone will not shield employers from liability under Illinois law.

Practical Implications for Employers

This decision effectively expands the “workday” under Illinois law and creates meaningful divergence from federal wage-hour standards.  Activities that may now require compensation include, but are not limited to, security screenings and health checks; donning and doffing uniforms or protective gear; logging into systems or booting up equipment; waiting in line to enter the workplace; and walking time within controlled work environments.  Even small increments of time, when aggregated across employees, may create wage-and-hour exposure, particularly in class or collective actions.

Next Steps

Illinois employers should take proactive steps to reassess their pay practices, including:

• Auditing pre- and post-shift activities to identify time currently treated as non-compensable;
• Reviewing timekeeping systems to ensure all required activities are captured;
• Evaluating policies and procedures for required screenings, entry protocols, and preparatory tasks;
• Training managers and supervisors on expanded compensability standards; and/or
• Assessing litigation exposure for past practices, particularly in high-risk roles.

Employers should also consider conducting any audit or review of pay practices under attorney-client privilege and with work-product protections in place, where possible, to help mitigate risk.

The Illinois Supreme Court has made clear that the IMWL stands on its own, and in many cases, is more expansive than federal law. Employers operating in Illinois should promptly revisit their wage-hour compliance strategies to account for this broader definition of compensable work time.  For questions or assistance, please contact one of Honigman’s Employment and Labor Attorneys here.