Key takeaways

The Illinois Supreme Court issued a decision in Fausett v. Walgreen Co. expanding the scope of compensable work time.

Work-related activities performed before and after official shifts can trigger employer liability under state law.

Companies must adjust how they account for off-the-clock work activities to avoid wage claims.

Walgreens acted as the appellant in the legal action initiated by Calley Fausett.

The Decision

The Illinois Supreme Court has issued a ruling expanding the scope of compensable work time for employees across the state. In Fausett v. Walgreen Co., filed on November 20, 2025, the court addressed whether certain work-related activities performed before and after official shifts are compensable. The legal action, brought by Calley Fausett against the pharmacy chain, reached the state's highest court with Walgreens serving as the appellant. The court concluded that employers may face liability for preliminary and postliminary work activities under state law. This holding establishes that the time workers spend on required tasks immediately preceding or following their scheduled shifts cannot be universally excluded from their paid hours.

Why It Matters

The ruling shifts the baseline for wage and hour compliance in Illinois. By establishing that preliminary and postliminary work activities can trigger liability under state law, the court forces companies to account for off-the-clock work activities that they previously might have considered non-compensable. The decision creates a broader interpretation of what constitutes paid work time. Employers that rely on strict shift schedules without accounting for the time it takes employees to prepare for or wind down from their duties now face increased exposure to wage claims. This matters because it directly affects corporate payroll practices, timekeeping policies, and the potential volume of class-action litigation in state courts. When a state supreme court broadens the definition of compensable time, it alters the economic calculus for large employers operating within that jurisdiction.

Who Should Care

For lawyers

Management-side employment attorneys must immediately audit their clients' timekeeping practices to ensure compliance with the expanded scope of compensable work time in Illinois. The ruling in Fausett v. Walgreen Co. provides plaintiffs' counsel with a strong foundation to pursue claims based on unrecorded preliminary and postliminary tasks. Litigators will likely focus on discovery regarding employer policies that mandate pre-shift preparations or post-shift duties without corresponding compensation. Defense counsel will need to develop strategies to argue that certain minor activities fall outside the scope of compensability, though the ruling narrows the available defenses under state law.

For consumers/parties

Hourly workers in Illinois gain stronger protections against unpaid labor. If an employer requires tasks to be completed before clocking in or after clocking out, employees now have clearer legal backing to demand payment for that time. For companies, particularly large retailers like Walgreens, the decision necessitates a comprehensive review of operational protocols. Store managers and human resources departments must ensure that workers are not performing off-the-clock work activities that could lead to liability.

Legal Background

Wage and hour disputes frequently center on the exact boundaries of a workday. Historically, employers and employees have clashed over whether time spent preparing for a shift or wrapping up tasks after a shift constitutes compensable labor. While general legal principles require payment for all hours worked, the treatment of preliminary (pre-shift) and postliminary (post-shift) activities has often been a gray area. State laws sometimes diverge from federal standards, creating distinct compliance obligations depending on the jurisdiction. In Illinois, prior legal frameworks left room for debate regarding the extent to which employers had to track and pay for peripheral work tasks. Companies often argued that brief, pre-shift activities were incidental to the job and therefore non-compensable. Workers countered that any task performed for the employer's benefit should result in wages. The lack of a definitive ruling from the state's highest court allowed these competing interpretations to persist, leading to inconsistent practices across different industries.

What the Court Did

In Fausett v. Walgreen Co., the Illinois Supreme Court directly addressed the ambiguity surrounding off-the-clock work activities. The court examined whether certain work-related activities performed before and after official shifts are compensable under state law. By ruling against the appellant, Walgreens, the court established that employers may face liability for these preliminary and postliminary tasks. The decision expands the scope of compensable work time for employees in Illinois, rejecting the premise that all pre-shift and post-shift tasks can be categorically excluded from paid hours. The court reasoned that when an employer requires work-related activities, the time spent performing them holds economic value and warrants compensation. This determination requires companies to accurately account for off-the-clock work activities, ensuring that their timekeeping systems capture the full extent of a worker's compensable efforts.

How It May Be Applied

The ruling will likely prompt a wave of policy revisions across Illinois businesses. Employers must evaluate their specific operational requirements to identify any preliminary or postliminary tasks that now qualify as compensable work time. This could include activities ranging from equipment preparation and security checks to logging into computer systems or cleaning workstations. Because the court established that employers may face liability for these activities, companies will need to implement stricter timekeeping controls. Supervisors may be required to prevent employees from performing any work-related tasks before clocking in or after clocking out. Open questions remain regarding how lower courts will apply this ruling to highly specific, brief activities, but the immediate consequence is a mandate for broader time capture. Plaintiffs' attorneys will likely test the boundaries of the decision by filing claims based on various types of off-the-clock work, forcing courts to define the exact limits of compensability on a case-by-case basis.

Impact of the Ruling on Wage Policies

Aspect of Employment	Pre-Ruling Environment	Post-Ruling Environment
Off-the-Clock Work	Ambiguity regarding liability for peripheral tasks.	Clear liability for certain preliminary and postliminary work.
Timekeeping Practices	Standard shift tracking often deemed sufficient.	Must account for all required pre-shift and post-shift activities.
Employer Exposure	Lower risk for minor pre-shift or post-shift tasks.	Expanded scope of compensable work time increases wage claim risks.
Worker Protections	Unclear state-level backing for peripheral task pay.	Stronger legal foundation to demand pay for required off-shift tasks.

The Bottom Line

The Illinois Supreme Court has ruled that companies can be held legally responsible for not paying employees for required tasks performed just before or right after their scheduled shifts. This decision means that if an employer expects a worker to complete work-related activities off the clock, that time must be counted as paid labor, forcing businesses across the state to update how they track employee hours.

This article is general legal information and commentary about legal developments. It is not legal advice, does not address your specific situation, and is not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney. Reading this article and contacting us through this website do not create an attorney-client relationship.

Sources & authorities

Fausett v. Walgreen Co. (2025 IL 131444) — source
Fausett v. Walgreen Co. — source
Fausett v. Walgreen Co — source

Illinois Supreme Court Expands Pay for Off-the-Clock Work

Key takeaways