There are two types of meals in the service: those that are allowed according to salary scales, and those that are not. In order for a service meal period to be authorized by salary schedules, the following three conditions must be met: Sub-Division 11 (E) allows employers to require employees to pay time, provided certain conditions are met, and finds that the court has recognized that the defendant`s meal time policy in the transportation concrete industry is “particularly appropriate” , since the workers were responsible for the administration of rolling tones with a new batch manager. at any time during their working day. The employee`s lunch break therefore depended on the condition of the concrete in his truck. This is why the type of concrete mixing and delivery made it almost impossible to schedule outside of service time. The Court of Justice recalled that an employer is not required to answer in the affirmative at mealtimes, but only makes them available if necessary. Palacio`s employer has forced its employees to work the hours of service meals among sub-divisions 11 (E) and to sign agreements that waive their right to out-of-service meals. Mr. Palacio noted that the employer “was not required to comply with Sub-Division 11 (A) by adding a provision in the agreements granting workers the right to revoke it. A similar letter from the Department of Labour Standards Enforcement (“LSD”) also states that the language of the right of withdrawal is not necessary because “a nursing home complies with the requirements of [subdivision] 11 (E) and must not comply with [subdivision] 11 (A)”. The most untenable and the fight against these requirements is of course the third requirement – the “nature of work” condition.
To determine whether the “nature of the work” allows for a break from duty, courts and administrative authorities, such as the California Labour Commissioner, consider various “objective” factors, such as the type of work performed by the worker, whether other employees are available to lighten the burden on the worker, and whether the employer`s work product or process would be destroyed or damaged if the worker was discharged from all obligations. (Here is a recent letter of advice from the Labour Commissioner, which deals in more detail with this issue.) The availability of other employees to relieve an employee during a meal; Professional Notice: This decision makes it clear that a meal during use does not change the requirement that it last at least 30 minutes. However, the decision does not indicate what types of obligations, if any, can be met by a worker who has a meal in the workplace. If the employer requires the worker to remain in the workplace or facility during the meal period, the meal time must be paid. The same is true when the worker is exempt from all tasks during the meal period. Bono Enterprises, In. Bradshaw (1995) 32 Cal.App.4th 968. (1) (a) Home care workers eat with residents during residents` meals, and the employer provides the same meal free of charge to the worker; Or this, in response to your letter to the Commissioner of Labour, Arthur Lujan, on April 4, 2002, in which you asked the following question asking for clarification on the requirements of an authorized “service meal”: to determine whether “the nature of the work” prevents a worker from being exempted from any obligation, the Department of Labour Standards Enforcement considers that the general condition of an out-of-service meal can be guaranteed.
, and derogations from this general requirement must be interpreted in a restrictive manner so as not to enslave the purpose of the regulation.