10/4/2023 0 Comments California labor laws lunch breakThe decision firmly establishes that the practice of employer's having a "company policy" in their employee handbook that "permits" meal breaks will not be legal if there is an actual practice of managers pressuring employees to work through their breaks. In particular, the California Supreme Court noted that the "wage order and the governing statute do not countenance an employer's exerting coercion against the taking of, creating incentives to forego, or otherwise encouraging the skipping of legally protected breaks." A copy of the decision, entitled, "Brinker Restaurant Corporation" can be downloaded here. Only if ALL of the above are met will an employee be deemed to have taken a break. (4) The employer must not impede or discourage the employee from taking their 30-minute meal break. (3) The employer must permit a reasonable opportunity to take an uninterrupted 30-minute breaks and (2) The employer must relinquish control over all activities of the employee (1) The employer must relieve the employee of all duty That is, unless ALL of the following criteria are met, the employee is entitled to additional compensation for working through a meal break: UPDATE (April 12, 2012): The California Supreme Court published a decision that states that employers are required to provide employees "off-duty" meal breaks. was specifically addressing security guards who were required to carry a radio while on break, the rule would apply to all positions, such as nurses or technicians, that are expected to respond to emergency situations during breaks. Even if the employee does not respond to a page while on break, the fact that the employee was expected to respond to a page if one came up means that the employee was not relieved of all duty and is entitled to the additional pay. The requirement is that the employee is relieved of all duty. In particular, if an employee is required to carry a pager, cell phone, or radio and be available to respond to calls while on a meal or rest break then the break is not a valid meal or rest break, and the employee is entitled to an additional one hour of pay. clarifies that rest breaks must also be "duty-free." The Court noted that "rest" is the opposite of "work," so that in order to have a "rest break", you cannot be working. In 2012, the California Supreme Court held that all meal breaks had to be "duty-free." The recent decision of Augustus v. The California Supreme Court published another decision that confirms that California employees must be relieved of "all duty" for both meal and rest breaks.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |