Court Rules that Managers have no Duty to Make Staff take Lunches
Employers do not have a responsibility to force employees to take lunch breaks, but employers must not compel employees to work through breaks. An important decision concerning employment law relieves employers of responsibility when workers choose to work during meal breaks even when employers have adequately provided those breaks.Non-Unionized Employees vs. BrinkersNon-union hourly workers at Chilli’s and Romano’s Macaroni Grill charge that Brinkers, the parent company of both restaurant chains, violated labor laws by making legally required meal and rest breaks difficult to take while on the job.The California Supreme Court ruled that the class action lawsuit could not fault the employer for failing to force workers not to work during meal breaks. In handing down its opinion, the court said the responsibility employers have under the law requires them to ensure employers remain free of duties during those times. The court also said that employers need only accommodate meal breaks after the first five hours of work.Employees should use meal breaks for meals, but do not need to as long as employers do not use coercion or intimidation.Details of the CaseThe recent court ruling stems from a 2004 legal suit that says managers and supervisors at Brinkers designed work schedules that resulted in inadequate staffing during break times. An appellate court in California ruled four years later that employees can choose to work through breaks as long as employers relieve employees of responsibility during those times.Rest Breaks vs. Meal BreaksThe Supreme Court ruling distinguishes rest breaks from meal breaks. In doing so, the justices gave their imprimatur for the legal action that charges Brinkers with violating rest break laws. The court returned the meal-break part of the law to the trial court for further disposition. That court will decide whether meal-break charges can remain as part of the class action lawsuit.The Waiting GameEmployers in California have worked under uncertainty for several years, wondering whether they had to force people to stop working during time allocated for meals. According toMSNBC, employers who force workers to toil during breaks must pay more for that time as a penalty. An attorney from Los Angeles, Scott Witlin says that seemingly every employer in the state was a target of legal action and that many employees have received sizeable settlement in such legal cases.Because the law was difficult to interpret, many employers started paying penalty wages for every potential break-time violation. Other employers tried to force employees to stop working during those times.
