Skip to main content

Robinson v. Gosiger Machine Tools, LLC

INNDAugust 18, 2020No. 1:18-cv-00194
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Nature of Suit — the legal category of the dispute
710 Labor: Fair Standards
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Unknown
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
summary judgment
State
Indiana

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Wage Theft

Outcome

The court granted summary judgment in favor of Gosiger Machine Tools on Robinson's Fair Labor Standards Act and state wage-payment claims, holding that Robinson's pre-departure and post-arrival home activities were not 'integral and indispensable' to his principal work activities, so his commute time did not fall within the continuous workday rule and was not compensable under the Portal-to-Portal Act.

What This Ruling Means

**Robinson v. Gosiger Machine Tools, LLC** This case involved a worker who sued Gosiger Machine Tools, LLC for allegedly violating federal wage and hour laws. The employee claimed the company failed to pay proper wages under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), which sets rules for minimum wage, overtime pay, and other workplace compensation requirements. The court documents show this was a wage theft case where the worker believed they were not paid correctly for their work. However, the specific outcome of this case is not available in the court records provided. **What This Means for Workers:** This case highlights workers' rights under federal law to receive proper pay for their work. The Fair Labor Standards Act protects employees by requiring employers to pay at least minimum wage and overtime pay (time-and-a-half) for hours worked over 40 in a week. When workers believe their employer has violated these rules - such as not paying for all hours worked, skipping overtime pay, or paying below minimum wage - they can file lawsuits to recover the money they're owed. Workers should keep detailed records of their hours and pay to protect themselves if wage disputes arise.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse more:Wage Theft cases

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.