Employee broke the law without the boss knowing — Is company still at fault?
September 4, 2008 by Sam NarisiPosted in: Americans with Disabilities Act, FLSA, In this week's e-newsletter, Latest News & Views, Special Report, State Law
In a recent case, an employee sued his company for violating wage and hour regs — even though he was performing extra work without his manager’s permission. Read the facts and decide: Who won?
The facts:
An employee in California sued under state law because he missed several legally required meal breaks. However, the company had a policy stating employees’ right to breaks under the law, and the man’s boss never did anything to prevent him from taking breaks — he worked through them on his own. Why’d he sue? He claimed the company “failed to ensure” that employees took their breaks.
The employer said:
All employees were allowed to take meal breaks. If the employee didn’t take his, it was because he chose not to. And since management had no idea, the company couldn’t be held liable.
Who won the case?
Answer: The employer.
Why: The court agreed with the company, ruling that employers must “authorize and permit” meal breaks and not “impede, discourage or dissuade” employees from taking them. But the law doesn’t say they have to “ensure” employees take them.
If an employee skips a break without a manager demanding it or even knowing about it, there’s no way to hold the company liable.
Cite: Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. Superior Court
Tags: California, meal breaks, rest periods, wage and hour
September 10th, 2008 at 10:09 am
Finally a ruling in favor of employers in our pro-employee sate. It is impossible to ensure 1000 employees take their breaks or meal periods.
September 10th, 2008 at 11:03 am
Whew! Sounds like this one turned out right. If the employer had prevented him from taking his break, that would have been another story, but short of going around and checking on everyone, or taking them to lunch, how would you continually monitor this?
The one thing we do is check the electronic time clock punches. If someone isn’t clocking in and out for lunch, we verify they didn’t go, and if not, tell them they need to take their lunch break and that they are not to work through lunch. Leads, supervisors and managers are told never to impede an employee from taking a meal break and that’s also our written policy. Obviously, checking the punches only works for hourly employees. We’re not in a state where it’s mandated, but we look at it as a safety / health issue and feel it’s important for our employees to have that break. The only time we would ask someone to give up their meal break is if we had a really critical situation going down and desperately needed their help.
September 10th, 2008 at 3:26 pm
This is not necessarily breaking news, as this case was decided at the end of July, but it is a step in the right direction. However, until the CA Supreme Court makes a decision this is not an end to this situation.
Until there is a final decision, our company is still keeping a very careful watch on all of our non-exempt employees to make sure that they are taking all of their rest & meal breaks every day.
It’s actually rather nice to have an article that is relevant to the unique employment situation we have here in CA. Most of the time, these articles are interesting to read, but have little impact on how HR has to function here. We either already have to do whatever is described or the advice is not strict enough to comply with state law.
September 10th, 2008 at 4:07 pm
Was the employer paying the 1 hour premium pay for each missed meal break?