Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Labor & Employment Law Blogs -> California Labor & Employment Defense Blog
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Labor & Employment Law
: California Labor & Employment Defense BlogWhat Are Employers To Do In The Wake of Brinker v. Superior Court?
It was a pleasure conducting the presentation on “Meal and Rest Breaks in California: Why the Brinker Ruling Is Good News for Employers, and Where Caution is Still Required” through Business & Legal Reports. It was wonderful to have such a large audience, as well as great follow-up questions.
I’ve had a lot of request for the concluding points I made about what employers should do while we are waiting for the California Supreme Court to determine whether or not it will review the Brinker v. Superior Court (Hohnbaum) decision. So here are my concluding remarks I made during the presentation:
- Employers should continue to have a strict written policy on providing meal and rest breaks and continue to monitor that employees are actually taking meal breaks.
- Make sure management knows about and enforces these rules.
- Record meal breaks! This is already an obligation of California employers, and the Brinker decision does not change this obligation.
- Policies should require employees to come forward to report if they have been forced to work through a meal break.
- Brinker’s policies, which were found to be valid by the appellate court, are a good example of policies California employers should have in place. For example, Brinker had a written policy titled “Break and Meal Period Policy for Employees in the State of California.” Brinker also required its employees to sign a form stating “I am entitled to a 30-minute meal period when I work a shift that is over five hours” and that “If I work over 3.5 hours during my shift, I understand that I am eligible for one [10-]minute rest break for each four hours that I work.” Brinker’s policy also stated that an employee’s failure to abide by the policy could result in termination. The court held that this ultimately was sufficient under California law to “provide” meal and rest breaks, only if the defendant has taken steps to establish and communicate the policy. Then if an employee fails to take a meal or rest break voluntarily, the employer is not liable for damages.
Until we know whether or not the California Supreme Court will grant review of the Brinker decision, employers should definitely be taking proactive steps to protect themselves.
Full post as published by California Labor & Employment Defense Blog on September 11, 2008 (boomark / email).
Selection of State Supreme Court Judges
How State Court Judges are Selected
Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Career Choices
Descriptions of law enforcement occupations
California Supreme Court Proposition 8 Decision
Court Rejects Challenges to Proposition 8, but Finds Marriages Valid
Is Barack Obama a Natural Born Citizen?
Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz (Supreme Court): Does Obama meet the constitutional requirements to be President
Heart of Atlanta v United States
Supreme Court Decision: Civil Rights Act Protected by Interstate Commerce Clause
Unwed Fathers' Rights in Adoption
Landmark Cases in Adoption Law Shape Law with respect to Unwed Fathers
Brinker International
allegedly falsely advertising the nutritional information on their so-called low calorie menu selections.
Lake Superior Center Authority
$275,000 settlement reached in construction dispute.
Ebay Fined
French Court Sets Fine at $61 Million
Personal Injury
Appeals Court Upholds Congressional Legislation
Tomato Salmonella
Sheetz Convenience Stores agrees to confidential out-of-court settlement with food poisoning victim.
National Association of Realtors
Settlement reached in broker listing antitrust lawsuit, pending court approval.

"Workers Can't Catch a Break from Calif. Court"
L.A. Superior Court Judge Luros to retire
Calif. Case Demonstrates Importance of State Labor Law
Ind. Courts - "Public Interviews to be Held for St. Joseph Superior Court Vacancy"
L.A. Superior Court Judge Patricia L. Collins retires, joins ADR Services








