BRINKER RESTAURANT CORPORATION v. SUPERIOR COURT:
A FAVORABLE DECISION FOR EMPLOYERS REGARDING
MEAL AND REST PERIODS

A California Appellate Court issued a decision last week which clarifies California employers' obligations under the laws governing meal and rest periods and limits the availability of class recovery on such claims.

In Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. Superior Court , plaintiffs brought a class action complaint against Brinker Restaurant for alleged violations of California's meal and rest period requirements. In resolving these claims, the Court of Appeal made several important rulings: First, the court concluded that employers need only "provide" employees with meal and rest periods and need not "ensure" that employees actually take their breaks. Second, the court held that an employer can only be held liable for work performed by employees before or after they clock in and out if it "knew or should have known" its employees were working during that time. Third, the court held that employers are required to provide one thirty-minute meal break for employees who work between five and ten hours during a single shift, not for every five consecutive hours worked. Finally, the court confirmed that the meal and rest breaks need not occur in the middle of each work period if it is not practicable.

With respect to plaintiff's class certification, the court ruled that, under the circumstances of this particular case, the claims were not amenable to class treatment because they involved individualized assessments of the facts relating to each plaintiff's claims.

What Brinker Means to Employers

On its face, the Brinker decision eases the burden placed on California employers concerning meal and rest period claims by requiring only that employers provide such breaks, but do not have an obligation to ensure that they are taken. As such, Brinker affords California employers more flexibility in scheduling meal and rest periods and makes it easier for employers to comply with their meal and rest period obligations.

However, we advise employers to be cautious in making any changes to their policies or practices with respect to meal and rest periods based on this decision. Although the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement has issued an internal memorandum directing is staff to adopt the Brinker ruling as its official position, the best way to prove that required breaks have been "provided" is to show that they were actually taken. We remain available to review your policies to ensure that they are up to date and reflect the most current status in the law with respect to meal and rest period obligations.

***

For more information about the Brinker decision or about your current meal and rest period policies, please contact one of the members of Greenberg Glusker's Employment Group: Nancy Bertrando, Stephen Smith or Lisa Pierson Weinberger at (310) 553-3610.