HireCentrix News - News Articles

In a major decision on the scope of employers' liability for meal and rest period violations, a California court holds employers may be liable for up to two hours' additional wages per day.

In a major decision determining the scope of employers’ liability for meal and rest period violations, the California Court of Appeal in Los Angeles ruled that employers may be liable for up to two hours’ additional wages per day for meal and rest period violations. California law provides for premium pay of an additional hour of wages for each day that employers do not provide a meal or rest period as required.

Taking an approach treating meal and rest periods as separate categories, the court held in United Parcel Service, Inc. v. Superior Court that an employer may be liable for up to two hours of such premium wages per work day: one hour if the employer fails to provide a meal period, and another hour for not providing a rest period.

The decision involved 32 cases alleging meal and rest period violations, coordinated into a single matter in Los Angeles County Superior Court. The issue before the appeals court was the scope of liability imposed by California Labor Code section 226.7(b). The statute provides: “If an employer fails to provide a meal period or rest period in accordance with an applicable order of the Industrial Welfare Commission, the employer shall pay the employee one additional hour of pay at the employee’s regular rate of compensation for each work day that the meal or rest period is not provided.”

Effective in 2001, the statute has been the subject of varying interpretations concerning the number of premium pay amounts that may be due for violations in a single day. One interpretation argued that the law authorizes only one premium payment per work day, regardless of the number or type of break periods not provided in a day.

A second interpretation looked at meal and rest periods separately, with two premium payments possible per day: one for the failure to provide a meal period, with a second possible for any failure to provide any rest period. A third interpretation— argued by employees in some cases—has sought imposition of a separate premium pay amount for each meal or rest period violation. In administrative cases, the California Labor Commissioner has followed the second view, allowing recovery of separate amounts for meal and rest periods.

Open PDF: California Court holds employers liable for up to two hours’ wages per day for meal and rest period violations

Read More

Nixon Peabody

Comments: