On-Duty Meal Periods Are Not Considered a "Waiver"
Posted by Jennifer Barrera
A judge in the Northern District of California recently ruled that an on-duty meal period is not equivalent to a “waived” meal period. In McFarland v. Guardsmark, LLC, the employee (a security guard) worked shifts in excess of ten hours, thereby entitling him to two meal periods under California's Labor Code. The employee later filed a lawsuit against his employer, claiming the two on-duty meal periods in one shift were essentially two waived meal periods, and therefore violated his right to a duty-free meal period. The employee relied upon an excerpt from the Department of Labor Standards Enforcement (“DLSE”) Operations Manual that implied the DLSE considers an on-duty meal periods as a “waived” meal period and that an employee cannot waive two meal periods in one shift. The employer filed a motion for summary judgment and argued that an on-duty meal period is a type of paid meal period, not a waived meal period.
In her ruling, the judge rejected the DLSE’s interpretation of on-duty meal periods and stated that courts are not required to defer to the DLSE’s manual. The judge agreed with the employer and held that an on-duty meal period is not a waived meal period and, therefore, the employee may take two on-duty meal periods in one shift, assuming the other requirements for an on-duty meal period are satisfied.
The employee’s attorneys have indicated that they are planning to appeal this ruling, and we will provide updates if the court's decision is ultimately reviewed on appeal. In the interim, please contact us with any questions on this issue or to discuss the requirements an employer must satisfy to establish an on-duty meal period.