Some background on the issue of meal breaks that came up as an issue we really care about in our recent bargaining surveys…
If we are on our meal break (meaning our lunch break or, for applicable shifts, dinner break), we should be allowed to spend it however we choose, including taking a nap or going out of the building. Under California law, employers must provide an uninterrupted meal period of at least 30minutes to employees for every 5 hours of work. In this context, “providing a meal period” means the employer must provide an off-duty meal period. “Off-duty” means:
- Employees are relieved of all duty for an uninterrupted period of at least 30 minutes (the duration of the meal period).
- Employees are free to leave the workplace if they wish.
- Employer gives up control over the employees’ activities during the meal period.
It can be argued that employers who dictate what their employees should do during their breaks are effectively requiring them to remain “on-duty” and must, therefore, pay them.
That is exactly what a class of sanitation workers claimed when they filed a lawsuit against their employer, the City of Los Angeles. In 2006, trash truck driver, Jose Gravina, sued the City claiming he was regularly denied meal breaks and been disciplined for napping during his meal break. In 2011, the case became a class action effecting over 1,000 employees. The Bureau of Sanitation reportedly imposed the no-nap rule on its workers in an effort to prevent the public or news cameras catching city employees sleeping in their trucks. The City also prohibited its employees from gathering in one spot for a meal or traveling to locations away from their pickup routes during meal breaks.
Superior Court Judge John Shepard Wiley, Jr., noted: “The City does impose duties during meal periods—the duties to stay awake and to avoid congregating. The drivers are, thus, subject to the control of the City during their meal periods.” The Court of Appeals agreed. If an employer puts any restrictions on an employee’s meal period, the employer is still continuing to exert control over the employee. If the employee remains under the control of the employer, then the employee must be paid. After eight years of litigating the case, the City and the drivers have agreed to settle the case for $26 million.
There is a difference between sleeping on the job and sleeping during your legally-mandated off-duty break. The first one may get you fired, but the second is your right.
