today:
1,594
yesterday:
1,768
Total:
1,115,593

Articles about Careers

No Such Thing as a Free Lunch: ConocoPhillips to pay $15.5 Million to Settle Meal Break Lawsuit

In a case that establishes the potential results of violating State wage and hour laws, refinery workers have reached a $15.5 million deal to resolve their class action against ConocoPhillips Co. that accused the company of failing to provide them with meal breaks during which they were relieved of all duties, the plaintiffs told a California federal court Monday.

The Federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) does not require an employer to provide a meal break to employees, so meal breaks are regulated by State law. Earlier this year, the California Supreme Court outlined what an employer must do in providing a meal break to an employee. Unless all of the following criteria are met, the employee is entitled to additional compensation for working through a meal break:

(1) The employer must relieve the employee of all duty;
(2) The employer must relinquish control over all activities of the employee;
(3) The employer must permit a reasonable opportunity to take an uninterrupted 30-minute breaks; and
(4) The employer must not impede or discourage the employee from taking their 30-minute meal break.

Only if all of the above are met will an employee be deemed to have taken “a break.” In particular, the California Supreme Court noted that the “wage order and the governing statute do not countenance an employer’s exerting coercion against the taking of, creating incentives to forego, or otherwise encouraging the skipping of legally protected breaks.” Brinker Restaurant Corporation, Inc. v. Superior Court, 53 Cal.4th 1004 (Cal.Sup.Ct. 2012). The decision firmly establishes that the long time practice of employer’s having a “company policy” in their employee handbook that “permits” meal breaks will not be legal if there is an actual practice of managers pressuring employees to work through their breaks.

Most States, New York included, similarly require that the break be a “true break” meaning that if the employee is asked to do any one task, no matter how menial, during the break, it is not a true meal break and he must be compensated for that time and provided an additional half hour free from all labor. Workers at Conoco alleged that they were pressured to work through breaks by management and brought this class action claim. Until 2000, California workers could only bring an injunction to enforce the meal breaks, but that year the Legislature instituted money damages as an additional remedy for violating this requirement. As expected, this change in law brought a flurry of class action litigation, with this one being the largest settlement of such a claim ever reported.

ConocoPhillips, the fourth largest corporation in the US and the fifth largest oil refiner in the world, can handle this financial hit. I would, however, warn employers of a lesser size to act with extreme care in light of this settlement. It presents a clear cautionary tale about the potential exposure of making workers work through meals. The hospitality industry (restaurants and hotels) in particular would be wise to instruct managers and kitchen staff that a place should be set aside for workers to be able to take their meals uninterrupted. Too often in this industry, staff “eat on the fly” or don’t eat at all until the end of their shift or grab a bite while peeling potatoes or chopping onions. Such actions could lead to the filing of a lawsuit by staff for violating the meal breaks provided for by State and local laws. While it may not result in a $15 Million settlement, it could end up taking a bite out of any company’s bottom line.

 

http://www.courtroomstrategy.com/2012/12/no-such-thing-as-a-free-lunch-conocophillips-to-pay-15-5-million-to-settle-meal-break-lawsuit/

 

No. Subject Date Views
181 EEOC’s Definition of Sexual Harassment 2011.12.27 1315
180 Employee vs. Independent Contractor – Seven Tips for Business Owners 2011.12.18 618
179 SB 459: Penalties for employers who misclassify employees as independent contractors. 2011.12.18 628
178 Pay Notices Required to be Provided New Employees as of 1/1/2012 2011.12.18 728
177 Overtime 수당은 누가 언제 받을 수 있을까요? 2011.11.28 662
176 미국내 회사들의 평균 Holiday는 얼마나 주고 있는것일까? 2011.12.01 686
175 Employee Benefits in US provided by DOL Bureau of Labor Statistics 2011.11.30 636
174 Unpaid Lunch Break & Paid Smoke Breaks? 2011.11.30 6083
173 이런 Benefit이 있다면? 2011.11.30 750
172 미국내 회사들의 평균 Holiday는 얼마나 주고 있는것일까? 2011.12.01 736
171 Unpaid Lunch Break & Paid Smoke Breaks? 2011.11.30 717
170 이런 Benefit이 있다면? 2011.11.30 724
169 Rate Your Vacation - 우리회사의 Vacation은 좋은 편인가? Benchmarking해보셔요! 2011.11.30 746
168 Exempt vs Non-Exempt Employees 2011.11.28 659
167 Exempt vs Non-Exempt Employees 2011.11.28 674
166 Litigation Cases - Misclassification (스타벅스의 OT관련 법적소송건- 3) 2011.11.28 764
165 Litigation Cases (Overtime을 주지 않는 salary로 잘못 구분한 경우의 법적 소송건- 2) 2011.11.28 787
164 Litigation Cases - Misclassification (Overtime을 주지 않는 salary로 구분한 경우의 법적 소송건) 2011.11.28 765
163 Misclassification의 경우 Penalty는 얼마나 될까? 2011.11.28 693
162 FLSA Status-직원 급여를 Hourly로 혹은 Salary로 주는것은 회사 재량일까? 2011.11.28 18143
161 NY State - New Release - effective 1/1/2012 2012.01.15 669
160 CA State - New Hire Requirement - Effective as of 1/1/2012 2012.01.15 705
159 Interview Question-Candidates should not be asked - 인터뷰시 하면 안되는 질문들!! 2011.12.26 652
158 Interview Question-Candidates may be asked - 인터뷰시 물어봐도 되는 질문들 2011.12.26 661
157 Hiring Interview할때 범하기 쉬운 5가지 실수 2011.12.26 672
156 Interview Question-Candidates should not be asked - 인터뷰시 하면 안되는 질문들!! 2011.12.06 797
155 Interview Question-Candidates may be asked - 인터뷰시 물어봐도 되는 질문들 2011.12.06 878
154 Common Interviewing Mistakes -인터뷰할 때 가장 범하기 쉬운 실수 5가지!! 2011.12.06 788
153 Employment Law Basics 2016.01.14 949
152 연령 차별' 해고 60대에 2600만달러 배상 2014.03.01 1346
151 McDonald's Restaurants of California, Inc. Settles EEOC Religious Discrimination Lawsuit 2013.12.27 1481
150 EEOC And Cooper University Health Care Reach Accord on Reasonable Accommodation Issues 2013.09.04 1813
149 Mississippi Holiday Inn Franchisee Sued by EEOC for Pregnancy Discrimination 2013.09.02 1517
148 AT&T to Pay Quarter Million Dollars to Settle EEOC Agen Disrimination Suit 2013.09.02 1682
147 BASF Corp. to Pay $500,000 to settle EEOC Retaliation Lawsuit Against Cognis 2013.06.08 1849
146 Stone Pony Pizza Sued for Race Discrimination 2013.06.08 1928
145 Panda Express Agrees to Early Settlement with EEOC to Resolve Sexual Harassment Suit 2013.06.08 1719
144 Joe-Ryan Enterprises to Pay $15K to Settle EEOC Sexual Harassment Lawsuit 2013.06.08 1729
143 $22.5 Million Verdict Reversed Where Employer Admitted Its Vicarious Liability For Employee’s Negligence 2013.05.28 1627
142 Egg Giant National Food to Pay $650,000 to Settle EEOC Sexual Harassment Lawsuit 2013.05.26 1734
141 $192,500-EEOC settles Sex harassment and Retaliation Suit Against Grace Episcopal Church 2013.05.26 1585
» No Such Thing as a Free Lunch: ConocoPhillips to pay $15.5 Million to Settle Meal Break Lawsuit 2013.03.03 1526
139 AT&T Workers Claim Lunch Break Violations 2013.03.03 1496
138 Article : Love Contract 2012.10.22 1295
137 Fremont Toyota Pays $400,000 to Settle EEOC's Harassment and Retaliation Lawsuit - Allegation 2012.08.19 1482
136 Fremont Toyota Pays $400,000 to Settle EEOC's Harassment and Retaliation Lawsuit -Press Release-08-07-12 2012.08.18 1468
135 Owner of 25 McDonald's Restaurants to Pay $1 Million in EEOC Sexual Harassment Suit 2012.08.04 1344
134 Comfort Inn Oceanfront South Sued By EEOC for Religious Discrimination 2012.08.04 1442
133 Caldwell Freight Lines to Pay $120K to Settle EEOC Race Discrimination Lawsuit 2012.08.04 1258
132 Wrongful Termination Lawsuits on the Rise 2012.07.07 843