California Labor Law Help

[Airenn]

Here's what I don't understand:

(a) An employer may not employ an employee for a work period of more than five hours per day without providing the employee with a meal period of not less than 30 minutes, except that if the total work period per day of the employee is no more than six hours, the meal period may be waived by mutual consent of both the employer and employee. An employer may not employ an employee for a work period of more than 10 hours per day without providing the employee with a second meal period of not less than 30 minutes, except that if the total hours worked is no more than 12 hours, the second meal period may be waived by mutual consent of the employer and the employee only if the first meal period was not waived. (b) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), the Industrial Welfare Commission may adopt a working condition order permitting a meal period to commence after six hours of work if the commission determines that the order is consistent with the health and welfare of the affected employees.

(c) Subdivision (a) does not apply to an employee in the wholesale baking industry who is subject to an Industrial Welfare Commission wage order and who is covered by a valid collective bargaining agreement that provides for a 35-hour workweek consisting of five 7-hour days, payment of one and one-half times the regular rate of pay for time worked in excess of seven hours per day, and a rest period of not less than 10 minutes every two hours.

(d) If an employee in the motion picture industry or the broadcasting industry, as those industries are defined in Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Order Numbers 11 and 12, is covered by a valid collective bargaining agreement that provides for meal periods and includes a monetary remedy if the employee does not receive a meal period required by the agreement, then the terms, conditions, and remedies of the agreement pertaining to meal periods apply in lieu of the applicable provisions pertaining to meal periods of subdivision (a) of this section, Section 226.7, and Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Order Numbers 11 and 12.

(e) Subdivisions (a) and (b) do not apply to an employee specified in subdivision (f) if both of the following conditions are satisfied:

(1) The employee is covered by a valid collective bargaining agreement.

(2) The valid collective bargaining agreement expressly provides for the wages, hours of work, and working conditions of employees, and expressly provides for meal periods for those employees, final and binding arbitration of disputes concerning application of its meal period provisions, premium wage rates for all overtime hours worked, and a regular hourly rate of pay of not less than 30 percent more than the state minimum wage rate.

(f) Subdivision (e) applies to each of the following employees:

(1) An employee employed in a construction occupation.

(2) An employee employed as a commercial driver.

(3) An employee employed in the security services industry as a security officer who is registered pursuant to Chapter 11.5 (commencing with Section 7580) of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code, and who is employed by a private patrol operator registered pursuant to that chapter.

(4) An employee employed by an electrical corporation, a gas corporation, or a local publicly owned electric utility.

(g) The following definitions apply for the purposes of this section:

(1) "Commercial driver" means an employee who operates a vehicle described in Section 260 or 462 of, or subdivision (b) of Section 15210 of, the Vehicle Code.

(2) "Construction occupation" means all job classifications associated with construction by Article 2 (commencing with Section 7025) of Chapter 9 of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code, including work involving alteration, demolition, building, excavation, renovation, remodeling, maintenance, improvement, and repair, and any other similar or related occupation or trade.

(3) "Electrical corporation" has the same meaning as provided in Section 218 of the Public Utilities Code.

(4) "Gas corporation" has the same meaning as provided in Section 222 of the Public Utilities Code.

(5) "Local publicly owned electric utility" has the same meaning as provided in Section 224.3 of the Public Utilities Code.

Here's the full link: [1] [1] [1] http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/di...0&file=500-558



**My question is this: I am a server, food industry -- Our employer makes up take breaks for shifts over 6 hours. If I am reading right, there is a way around this so that we don't have to. Is that possible?

I don't like nor need to take a break and I feel it interrupts my tables/flow for 30 minutes. When I worked in NY we didn't have to. So I am trying to see what my options are and how to go about it.**

[Cream Soda]

I always hated breaks. Especially places with hour breaks. I'd be a 25 min bike ride from the place, so if I was never worth it to go home, since round trip would be 50 mins, so I'd end up just sitting there doing nothing for an hour. I'd be like can I just take a half hour break and go home half hour early?

[Salodin]

They usually don't let you waive it, cause you can just as easily file a complaint saying they made you work over hours w/o a break.

Just take the break and work a longer shift, or leave after 6 hours.

[Melena]

It's a grey area. Part of the problem is a lot of places are terrified of lawsuits and don't have the money to lawyer up for anything labor board related (assuming your at a mom and pop type place, not a chain). If your talking about part (c) I think that deals more with baking and what not since they have to start at an early hour and may not have suitable relief while performing their duties. If you are working over 6 hours as a server, just take your 30 and enjoy your free or half off meal.

[Suvhater]

what salodin said, the law basically forces their hand in CA. If they dont make you take a 30 min break after 6 hours or anytime in an average 8 hour day then they have no defense against a complaint to the CA Labor Board. The fines to the business from the labor board can be excessive.

As a for-instance, a good friend of mine drew up a complaint for some wages he wasnt paid after he was terminated. Not only is he getting his wages, they asked about his lunch breaks and found he had received none. He is being paid for those as well. After his case was filed, they then went to all the other employees of said business and found they had been treated likewise. The owner is now liable for over $5000 to his employees and former employees, as well as over $10,000 in fines that will be paid into some sort of fund.

Follow the rules or learn the REALLY hard way if you run a business in CA.

[Meresgi]

I remember working at Wal-mart they demanded we take an hour break and 2 15min breaks for a 7 hr or more shift, you could get fired if they noticed you working through any breaks as well. Was a pain in the ass because like Cream said I was 20ish mins away from the Wal-mart and driving home and then back was a waste of gas and time. I usually just wound up running across the street to McDonalds and sitting around watching their TV.

[mallister]

fyi, recent federal court rulings found that your employer is NOT liable if you just choose not to take a break in cali. they have to offer them, but if you don't take them, it's on you. we were scratching our heads over the whole thing at work. shouldn't be too hard to googlefu if you're interested.

as above poster stated though, if your employer even has the appearance of being shady, cali labor laws will steamroll them.

[Kohan]

Learn to chill the fuck out. Seriously.

The people who are saying that they don't like breaks in this thread are usually the ones slaving at their blue collar jobs. Retail servant, a freakin' waiter, and so on—and you wonder why the lower class in this country has an image of being overworked and underpaid? You're perpetuating the problem. You don't look more impressive because you don't want to take your breaks, you're simply easier to take advantage of. This kind of doormat mentality can also get you passed over for promotions rather than looked at for them. You should have some expectations for what you get back (beyond your wage, tips, etc.), and breaks are one of the only opportunities for that.

If you're getting a break, don't sit there and wish you were grinding away at yourself for the man for another fifteen minutes. Go for a walk, let your mind wander, bring a book to read on your breaks—give your body the brief rest it needs. And if you want to take pride in your work and do a damn good job, consider that your period to rejuvenate and do better when you're back at work.

If none of that works for you, the previous posts were right: you can't do that in California, so you'll have to deal regardless.

[izembo]

generally the 30 min meal break is unpaid

[Tajin]

All the more reason to take said break

[Tyche]

Learn to chill the fuck out. Seriously.

The people who are saying that they don't like breaks in this thread are usually the ones slaving at their blue collar jobs. Retail servant, a freakin' waiter, and so on—and you wonder why the lower class in this country has an image of being overworked and underpaid? You're perpetuating the problem. You don't look more impressive because you don't want to take your breaks, you're simply easier to take advantage of. This kind of doormat mentality can also get you passed over for promotions rather than looked at for them, as nobody respects a pussy. You should have some expectations for what you get back (beyond your wage, tips, etc.), and breaks are one of the only opportunities for that which peons get.

If you're getting a Goddamn break, don't sit there and wish you were grinding away at yourself for the man for another fifteen minutes. You're still getting paid, so fuck that worrywart shit. Go for a walk, let your mind wander, bring a book to read on your breaks—give your body the brief rest it needs. And if you want to take pride in your work and do a damn good job, consider that your period to rejuvenate and do better when you're back at work.

If none of that works for you and you want to be an unnecessarily dedicated slave, the previous posts were right: you can't do that in California, so suck it up.

^ Has no nurses in the family

[dejet]

in NY my hour lunch is not paid(but to hell with not taking it) The only good that comes out of working my break is I do get time and a half; and more times then not it will lead to double time as anything over my normal hours(40) will be time and a half as well. So its nice getting paid from time to time but it really is not a lot of money when you think about it.

50x5= $250? ya, sorry not worth working 9 hours without any stopping.

I will always take my breaks, short of me being the CEO of citibank. Even then unless my break somehow could get me

A)fired
B)Cost me my Pay

Id still take it. Half the time I just chill around and talk to co-workers/text/TV/read. I get worked to the bone and I damn well will be taking my break.

[mallister]

lots of places that wouldn't fly; overtime has to be not just approved for us, but our managers have to write out justification for us taking it. 'i was bored so i worked through lunch' isn't going to cut it.

[Cream Soda]

Learn to chill the fuck out. Seriously.

The people who are saying that they don't like breaks in this thread are usually the ones slaving at their blue collar jobs. Retail servant, a freakin' waiter, and so on—and you wonder why the lower class in this country has an image of being overworked and underpaid? You're perpetuating the problem. You don't look more impressive because you don't want to take your breaks, you're simply easier to take advantage of. This kind of doormat mentality can also get you passed over for promotions rather than looked at for them, as nobody respects a pussy. You should have some expectations for what you get back (beyond your wage, tips, etc.), and breaks are one of the only opportunities for that which peons get.

If you're getting a Goddamn break, don't sit there and wish you were grinding away at yourself for the man for another fifteen minutes. You're still getting paid, so fuck that worrywart shit. Go for a walk, let your mind wander, bring a book to read on your breaks—give your body the brief rest it needs. And if you want to take pride in your work and do a damn good job, consider that your period to rejuvenate and do better when you're back at work.

If none of that works for you and you want to be an unnecessarily dedicated slave, the previous posts were right: you can't do that in California, so suck it up.

My post was referring to the unpaid off the clock breaks. I have no problem with getting paid to do nothing.

[Tajin]

^ Has no nurses in the family

Shit is situational, see: workers at melting nuclear plants (AFK having my 3 eyed burger homies, back when half japan is under the sea)

[Kanriel]

Hmm, as a manager at a pizza place breaks are only ever spoken about as a means of saving on cost of labor, we very regularly have 6 hour shift employees and no breaks for them. And of course as a manager I often work 10-12 hour shifts with no breaks, at least not of the official variety, though I can sit on my ass and have something to eat if I want. But I'm not allowed to leave the store as there needs to always be a manager in the store and usually only one works a shift. Wonder how many laws are being broken here...

[miokomioko]

I'm pretty sure as of July 1st, it is now a legal option for employees to "work through lunch" in California.

http://blogs.findlaw.com/california_...nch-break.html

We conclude an employer's obligation is to relieve its employee of all duty, with the employee thereafter at liberty to use the meal period for whatever purpose he or she desires. But the employer need not ensure that no work is done.

It's basically there to make sure no one is choosing to work through their breaks and then turn around and sue for not getting a break... but at least the option is there now. You legally have to get offered a break, but you can do whatever the fuck you want with it now.

[Kohan]

^ Has no nurses in the family

I'll tell you what I do have: a violent opposition to workers being exploited, and nurses are some of the most victimized. They're horrifically overworked, definitely underpaid, serve the public in some of the most mentally and physically demanding positions this world could offer, and deserve those breaks that they don't get more than virtually anyone.

If you think I don't sympathize with them, that couldn't be further from the truth. Do I think they shouldn't get their breaks, though? Of course not. In fact—and you likely know this—research has shown time and time again that the fatigue which nurses, doctors, etc., costs lives, even as it saves them. It is a horrific example, and exactly why labor law violations should not be tolerated, at all.

When I mentioned paid breaks earlier, I meant to also refer to lunch breaks, so I do count that just as much. You are clocking out for that time, but by getting that break, you are working a shift long enough to justify it—considering, you are still making more money. Like the aforementioned nursing example, research has proven that workers in any industry produce better quality work when they're given adequate break time. Our reputation for being one of the most overworked countries in the world does not lead to our being the most productive, and is truthfully a weakpoint. It's honestly illogical, as a lot of the overtime that corporations waste their money on could be saved with superior project management.

I'm really going too far into this for this thread, though.

As for the pizza manager: assuming you're in California, if you're on salary, you are not subject to the same set of laws as hourly workers. Furthermore, it is legal for an employer to have an employee work, say, four ten hour days rather than five eight hour days, but this must be an arrangement made ahead of time and not on the fly. You also have to get your meal breaks, and again, if you're hourly, it is a complete violation of state law if you work at all during those breaks. I understand that something else was posted which contradicts this, but there's a difference between you doing it willingly and your being forced to.

I encourage you to not tolerate this. Contact the labor board. They have various phone lines you can call for a free consultation on the matter. I have done this in the past, and have landed a few different companies in hot water (not to mention that I've been reimbursed for lost time). Companies usually bank on the fact that their employees are too scared to do anything about this abuse, and unfortunately, they are often right.

There's a reason you shouldn't be afraid, however: as long as you keep a paper trail between yourself and whoever you start consulting regarding labor law violations, your employer cannot fire you over it, lest they expose their company to something even more costly: a lawsuit.

[hey]

It's honestly illogical, as a lot of the overtime that corporations waste their money on could be saved with superior project management.

That sounds bad for workers who are paid by the hour.

[Kohan]

That sounds bad for workers who are paid by the hour.

Not when you take the psychological impact into consideration. Overtime isn't always a good thing.