If you cannot read this email, click here to read it online.
Allen Matkins Labor & Employment Legal Alert
Baldwin J. Lee

Baldwin J. Lee
(415) 273-7446 blee@allenmatkins.com

Michelle S. Dangler
Michelle S. Dangler
(949) 851-5435
mdangler@allenmatkins.com
 
Corporate Counsel Magazine

The 2006 ALM Survey of Fortune 500 companies named Allen Matkins as a "Go-To" law firm for labor and employment.

California Supreme Court Resolves Issue of Time Limits for Meal/Rest Period Claims  

Yesterday, in a highly anticipated decision, the California Supreme Court dealt a disappointing blow to California employers when it rejected the argument that the statute of limitations for meal/rest period violations is 1 year and ruled, instead, that employees filing such claims may seek damages going back 3 years in time.
(PDF Murphy v. Kenneth Cole Productions, Inc., April 16, 2007.)

California's Labor Code and Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Orders impose strict meal and rest period obligations on employers. At issue in Kenneth Cole was Labor Code section 226.7, which states that an employer failing to provide a proper meal or rest period shall pay the employee one additional hour of pay.

The question before the Court was whether this one additional hour of pay is a "wage" (subject to a 3-year statute of limitations) or a "penalty" (subject to a 1-year statute of limitations). In concluding that it is a wage, not a penalty, the Court, in a unanimous 7-0 decision, relied on the express language of Labor Code section 226.7 and its legislative history. In conjunction with California's Business and Professions Code section 17200, the effect of this ruling is 4 years of potential liability for meal/rest period claims.

Because this decision may spark a new round of meal/rest period class action lawsuits, employers are strongly encouraged to carefully review their policies and procedures for compliance with California law.

The Allen Matkins Labor & Employment Law Department is handling numerous cases involving meal/rest period issues and is closely monitoring developments in this area.


 

Related practices:
- Labor & Employment

 

Orange County
(949) 553-1313
Los Angeles
(213) 622-5555
Dwight L. Armstrong
Michelle S. Dangler
Michael R. Farrell
Patrick J. Grady
Mark J. Grushkin
Candace M. Harrison
Stephen J. Kepler
Baldwin J. Lee
Jennie L. Lee
Monica M. Quinn

Roberta V. Romberg
Michael D. Ryan
John M. Scheppach
Maria Z. Stearns
Samuel H. Stein
Jennifer Vogt-Lowell
Jason A. Weiss
Charlene J. Wilson
Amy Wintersheimer Findley

San Diego
(619) 233-1155
San Francisco
(415) 837-1515
Century City
(310) 788-2400
Del Mar Heights
(858) 481-5055
 

 

California Labor Code section 226.7

(a) No employer shall require any employee to work during any meal or rest period mandated by an applicable order of the Industrial Welfare Commission.

(b) 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.