martindale.com Legal Library
|
California Supreme Court's Ruling on Meal and Rest Periods Strikes Blow to Employers by Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C. Greenville Office
| |
|
February 20, 2008
Previously published on April 16, 2007
In an eagerly anticipated decision, the California Supreme Court ruled today that the one-hour of additional pay due to employees for each day that they are not provided with a meal or rest period constitutes a "wage" rather than a "penalty." The practical significance of this ruling is that the premium-pay requirement for meal and rest period violations is subject to a three-year statute of limitations (which effectively is extended to four years as a claim under California's Unfair Competition Law, Business & Profession Code sections 17200, et seq.).
|
The views expressed in this document are solely the views of the author and not Martindale-Hubbell. This document is intended for informational purposes only and is not legal advice or a substitute for consultation with a licensed legal professional in a particular case or circumstance. |
Practice Area Resource Centers
|
|