Meal and rest period requirements have played a huge role in the wage and hour litigation scene for more than five years – indeed, the issue has grown into the litigation du jour for both class and individual actions.  The excitement over the food fight had its genesis in the passage of AB 60 – which restored daily overtime in 2000 as well as codifying the requirement that employers provide meals periods (Labor Code section 512), and the passage of AB 2509 in 2000 which added the meal period remedy provision to the Labor Code (section 226.7).  The incentive for the flood of litigation is the remedy for failing to provide the meal (and rest) periods as required – an extra hour of pay at the regular rate for violations of each of the meal and rest requirements, respectively.  The food fight was not resolved in 2007 when the California Supreme Court issued its decision in Murphy v. Kenneth Cole, (40 Cal 4^th 1094 (2007)) – many questions remain unanswered to confuse employers.  There are currently several additional critical questions waiting for resolution before the California Supreme Court.  This webinar explores these issues.

Join Jamie Rudman, Attorney, Simpson, Garrity, Innes & Jacuzzi, PC, for a discussion on:

• Meal and Rest Basic – the Labor Code and Wage Orders
• The remedy – the cost of noncompliance
• Why the remedy – penalty v. premium – was an important issue
• Enforcement questions post Kenneth Cole
  • Timing of meal and rest breaks
  • How to calculate the regular rate and overtime rate when the remedy is applicable
  • How to document the remedy on the pay stub and in payroll records
  • “De minimis” violations – do rounding rules apply
  • Is there any remedy other than the extra premium hour if employers require employers to miss meal and rest breaks
• When has an employer adequately “provided” a meal break?
• Timing of meal breaks – every 5 hours?
• What remains at issue?

Jamie Rudman, Attorney, Simpson, Garrity, Innes & Jacuzzi, PC

Jamie Rudman, Attorney,  Simpson, Garrity, Innes & Jacuzzi, PC, has extensive experience representing management in labor and employment matters. Ms. Rudman has defended employers, managers and supervisors in state and federal lawsuits filed by current and former employees for wrongful termination, sexual harassment, discrimination, wage disputes and breach of contract. In addition, she has represented employers before the Department of Fair Employment and Housing, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the National Labor Relations Board, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board, the Division of Labor Standards and Enforcement and Cal-OSHA. Ms. Rudman has significant experience representing and counseling employers in matters involving unions, ranging from organizing campaigns, strikes and protests, unfair labor practice charges and arbitration under collective bargaining agreements.

 

Ms. Rudman also has significant experience counseling employers on all aspects of the employer/employee relationship, including discipline and termination questions, leave of absence issues, wage and hour requirements, employee classification issues, civil rights/discrimination issues, commission plans, employment contracts, employee handbooks and policies. She has also conducted training sessions for managers and supervisors on a variety of issues, such as implementation of new personnel policies, sexual harassment, diversity, leaves of absence, opposing union organizing activity, workplace safety and employee privacy rights.”