.

LOCAL BUSINESS: Lunch Breaks Not Required, State Supreme Court Rules

Hundreds of local businesses are impacted by the unanimous opinion that found forcing companies to oversee lunch breaks is unmanageable.

This week the California Supreme Court ruled employers don’t have to ensure workers take legally mandated lunch breaks.

Hundreds of local businesses are impacted by the unanimous April 12 opinion that found forcing companies to oversee lunch breaks is unmanageable.

The opinion written by Associate Justice Kathryn Werdegar explained that while state law still requires employers to provide a 30-minute meal break, employees can use the time to do as they please.

"The employer is not obligated to police meal breaks and ensure no work thereafter is performed," Werdegar wrote.

In 2001, California became one of only a few states to impose penalties for employers who violate meal-break law.

The April 12 decision stemmed from a case filed nine years ago by workers against Dallas-based Brinker International, the parent company of Chili's and other restaurants. The workers complained of missed breaks in violation of California labor law.

KYLE April 14, 2012 at 05:09 PM
Also if you do not get a 30 minute break your employer must pay you double (1 hour). The only change is when you take your break. It doesn't have to be at a specific time.
KYLE April 14, 2012 at 05:17 PM
The headline of the story is incorrect. As stated in the 3rd paragraph employers are STILL REQUIRED to provide a 30 minute break.
Ken Mayes April 15, 2012 at 01:07 AM
More yellow journalism. The law states in a nut shell that an employer is no longer required to babysit the employee.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »