Bookmark and Share
Contact Us
Services
About Us | Home| Testimonials
bLAWg
Your Employee Rights
New Law
Employee Rights Commentary
Site Map
Articles
Employee Rights Videos
Employee Rights Events Calendar
FIRM NEWS
Search Entire Site

Meal and Rest Break Violations, Part 1

Claims for Meal and Rest Break Violations

The recent case of Murphy v. Kenneth Cole (12/2/05) held that claims for meal and rest break violations must be brought within one year of the last date the claims accrued.

Facts of the Case:

  • Plaintiff Murphy filed a complaint with the Labor Commissioner in October 2002 and did not include claims for meal and rest break violations in his complaint
  • After the Labor Commissioner issued a decision in Plaintiff's favor, Defendant Kenneth Cole appealed the Labor Commissioner's decision
  • In November 2003, Murphy added claims for meal and rest period violations in his appeal claim
  • The Court of Appeal concluded that meal and rest breaks were penalties and thus had a 1-year Statute of Limitations (deadline to file the claim), unlike compensatory wages, which had a 3-year Statute of Limitations
  • The Court determined that because Murphy had added his meal and rest break claims in his appeal claim after the 1-year Statute of Limitations, he would not be able to recover penalties from the employer

Law regarding Meal and Rest Breaks Violations

  • Section 226.7(b) of the California Code of Regulations provides:
    • "If an employer fails to provide an employee a meal period or rest period in accordance with an applicable order of the Industrial Welfare Commission, the employer shall pay the employee one additional hour of pay at the employee's regular rate of compensation for each work day that the meal or rest period is not provided"
  • The Murphy Court observed that the statute did not compensate the employee for the time in which they were not provided a meal or rest break. Therefore, the payment for a violation could not be considered as compensation for the missed period, and the 3-year statute of limitations for compensation would not apply
  • The Court held that the under 226.7(b) the employer must pay the employee a fixed hour of regular pay for the unprovided period, thus the payment was more of a penalty, which has a 1-year statute of limitations

What You Should Do

  • If you have a potential meal or rest break violation, consult an attorney to determine whether you have a case.
  • ALL possible claims, especially claims for meal and rest break violations, should be filed within one year of the last date the earliest claim accrued.

Employee Rights Attorney Frank Pray

5160 Campus Drive

Newport Beach CA 92660

949.251.1006

877.job.atty


OBTAIN YOUR FREE

CASE EVALUATION

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Enter Your Email Address to Sign Up for Free Practical Tips on How to Assert Your Employee Rights
For Email Marketing you can trust

Amazon.com Coupons