Some cases probably shouldn't be taken to the wall, but UPS v. Superior Court (2-16-2011) certainly was and I'm not sure it needed to be. When sued by 32 employees seeking penalities for missed meal and rest breaks, UPS took the position that Labor Code Section 226.7 allowed only one premium payment penalty in a workday. Labor Code Section 226.7 provides:
(a) No employer shall require any employee to work during any meal or rest period mandated by an applicable order of the Industrial Welfare Commission.
(b) If an employer fails to provide an employee a meal period or rest period in accordance with an applicable order of the Industrial Welfare Commission, the employer shall pay the employee one additional hour of pay at the employee's regular rate of compensation for each work day that the meal or rest period is not provided.
Unfortunately for UPS, the Industrial Welfare Commission after reading the language of Section 226.7 promulgated regulations in the form of Wage Orders providing for separate premium payment penalties for meal break violations and rest break violations. According to the IWC's interpretation an employer can be liable for a penalty of 2 hours of additional pay for dening a required meal break and required rest breaks on the same workday, one hour of pay for each violation. The Court of Appeal found that not only was such an interpretation within the the authority of the IWC but that the legislative history of Labor Code Section 226.7 supported the IWC's interpretation.
So now we know (although maybe employers didn't really need this much clarity) that an employer's failure to provide employees with required meal and rest break are separate violations, each with liability for an additional hour of pay. The lesson for employers: let employees take meal and rest breaks or get ready to pay up.
