Question about California labor code - my wife's department at work is not allowed to take lunch (Brea: how much, attorney)

[Charles]

Originally Posted by CrownVic95

I don't think you are over reacting and I'm frankly amazed at most of the other responses thus far. They seem to be saying that companies should be allowed to break the law because times are tough. That is baloney and that kind of thinking is one of the main reasons employer abuse is on the rise and why we are heading back to the sweat shop days we thought were behind us for good.

Now, I'm not saying that there is no potential risk or hardship involved in fighting this. But unless people stand up to abuse, our quality of life will continue to slide. Bad people prevail when good people do nothing. What they did, as you describe it, is clearly illegal.

Sorry, I can't help you as far as where to report, but a little bit of web searching should yield an answer to that. Good luck.

What about if the employee is exempt from labor laws? (i.e. salaried exempt?)

[CrownVic95]

Originally Posted by Charles

What about if the employee is exempt from labor laws? (i.e. salaried exempt?)

Call center jobs that I know of are not normally exempt positions and I'm going on the assumption that this one is not.

[ehcsrop]

As I pointed out, the law may not have been broken, just stretched. Tell the wife to take really small bites (it's better for you anyway) and keep taking calls. If management complains about the food at her desk, I would politely remind them they provided the food and directed when to eat and when not to.

Keep a log of times, names and dates of all irregularities, It could be useful some day. Don't keep the log on a disk or leave any information at work. Jot it down on a slip of paper and record it at home.

[CrownVic95]

Originally Posted by ehcsrop

As I pointed out, the law may not have been broken, just stretched.

Stretched? Nonsense.

If she was required to clock out for lunch but not free to take lunch - to relax, do as she pleased, and enjoy her lunch, the law was broken. Where on earth is this kind of thinking coming from?

[Chava61]

From my understanding if one works 9-5 in California, the employer is supposed to give the employee a 30 minute lunch break.

[CrownVic95]

Originally Posted by Chava61

From my understanding if one works 9-5 in California, the employer is supposed to give the employee a 30 minute lunch break.

And during that time off the clock (that is the assumption I'm going on) the employer cannot tell them they can't eat lunch or even require them to attend a meeting.

[Charles]

Originally Posted by Chava61

From my understanding if one works 9-5 in California, the employer is supposed to give the employee a 30 minute lunch break.

It has never been my experience (or rarely but it was implied that we were working through lunch) to have a company paid lunch. In the case above, they could only charge 7.5 hours of labor OR work 9-530 (or equivalent). The law quote on the above post is consistent with this though the point of the quote is that the employer shall make the time available even though lunch is on the employee's own time.

[ehcsrop]

Originally Posted by CrownVic95

Stretched? Nonsense.

If she was required to clock out for lunch but not free to take lunch - to relax, do as she pleased, and enjoy her lunch, the law was broken. Where on earth is this kind of thinking coming from?

I didn't say I agreed. I just quoted the law. Looks to me as if there is a loophole. Not a morale one, but one nevertheless.

[CrownVic95]

Originally Posted by ehcsrop

I didn't say I agreed. I just quoted the law. Looks to me as if there is a loophole. Not a morale one, but one nevertheless.

Well, if by "loophole" you mean except that when a work period of not more than six (6) hours will complete the day’s work the meal period may be waived by mutual consent of the employer and the employee, it still does not apply here. First, there was no mutual consent. And, more importantly, that exception means that the employee is paid for that entire work period.

Perhaps the OP can confirm this, but his message conveys that she was not on the clock for this meeting and not paid for the time. If that is the case, the law was clearly broken.

And some seem to be confused by the employer's furnishing pizza. An employer may certainly do that if they wish, but that has nothing whatsoever to do with the labor law and does not allow them to control an employee off the clock and not being paid for the time.

[kiwilover70]

When you waive any break period it must be in writing (a form you typically sign) and it is documented by the organization. I have worked in a call center before and thank god it was union so none of this stuff could happen.We did waive meal breaks for less than 6 hrs if we chose but for 8 hrs or more you I do not believe you can waive a full hr. You can instead chose a 1/2 hr.Salaried employees are indeed different but I am not familiar with those rules at all. Have you checked with the labor relations board in California?And it is ridiculous to say since these are tough economic times that you should just take it and be thankful you have a job. Employers like these do not think that .They are just trying to maximize profit at anyones expense no matter what.