Rest Period Compliance Guidance

March 8, 2017

Last year, the California Supreme Court held that employer’s discretion to provide employees with on-duty meal periods does not apply to rest periods. Augustus v. ABM Sec. Servs. Inc., 2 Cal. 5th 257 (2016). The Supreme Court had previously outlined an employer’s obligation to provide meal periods in Brinker Rest. Corp. v. Superior Court, 53 Cal. 4th 1004, 1017 (2012). Augustus clarifies Brinker by holding that employees cannot be required to be “on call” during rest periods. This holding provides valuable insight for California employers. 

Reprinted with permission from the Daily Journal. ©2017 Daily Journal Corporation. All rights reserved.

+ READ MORE - READ LESS

The articles on our website include some of the publications and papers authored by our attorneys, both before and after they joined our firm. The content of these articles should not be taken as legal advice. The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views or official position of Robins Kaplan LLP.

Disclaimer

David Martinez

Partner

Member of Executive Board;
Pro Bono Chair, Los Angeles Office;
Member of the Firm's Diversity Committee

Christina M. Lincoln

Associate

Pronouns: she/her

Related Publications

October 1, 2020
How The Music Industry Can Weather COVID-19
Carly Kessler, Lauren Birkenstock - Law360
Fall 2020
Don’t Stop the Music: The Intersection Between Insurance and The Music Industry in the Era of COVID-19
Carly Kessler, Lauren Birkenstock - REAL TALK: The Robins Kaplan Business Law Update Fall 2020
Fall 2020
Interview with Uzma Saghir, Senior Corporate Counsel at Liberty Mutual
Manleen Singh - REAL TALK: The Robins Kaplan Business Law Update Fall 2020
August 11, 2020
FDA Should Follow FTC For Influencer Health Post Rules
Reena Jain, Carly Kessler - Law360
June 16, 2020
Collateralized Loan Obligations: Emerging Litigation Risks
Stacey Slaughter, Austin Hurt, Vincent Licata
Back to Top