- Acumen Powered by Robins Kaplan LLP®
- Affirmative Recovery
- American Indian Law and Policy
- Antitrust and Trade Regulation
- Appellate Advocacy and Guidance
- Business Litigation
- Civil Rights and Police Misconduct
- Class Action Litigation
- Commercial/Project Finance and Real Estate
- Corporate Governance and Special Situations
- Corporate Restructuring and Bankruptcy
- Domestic and International Arbitration
- Health Care Litigation
- Insurance and Catastrophic Loss
- Intellectual Property and Technology Litigation
- Mass Tort Attorneys
- Medical Malpractice Attorneys
- Personal Injury Attorneys
- Telecommunications Litigation and Arbitration
- Wealth Planning, Administration, and Disputes
Acumen Powered by Robins Kaplan LLP®
Ediscovery, Applied Science and Economics, and Litigation Support Solutions
-
August 9, 2022Robins Kaplan Recognized in The National Law Journal’s Top 100 Verdicts List For 2021
-
August 1, 2022Marc Betinsky Appointed to Magistrate Judge Merit Selection Panel
-
July 28, 2022Jake Holdreith, Robins Kaplan Shortlisted For LMG Life Sciences Awards
-
August 18, 2022Annual Robins Kaplan MAJ Welcome Reception
-
September 9, 2022LGBTQ Legal Services: Transgender Name Change Clinic
-
September 10, 2022Children’s Theatre Company 2022 Curtain Call Ball
-
Second QuarterANDA Approvals
-
Second QuarterGeneric Launches
-
July 19, 2022Briefly: What to do with a Reverse and Remand
-
August 9, 2022SoftBank Hit With $20+ Billion Quarterly Loss as Tech Investments Falter
-
August 5, 2022All Eyes on July Jobs Report Following Fed Rate Hikes
-
August 4, 2022Walmart to Cut 200 Corporate Positions Following Lowered Profit Forecasts
Find additional firm contact information for press inquiries.
Find resources to help navigate legal and business complexities.
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.
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.
Related Professionals
David Martinez
Partner
Pro Bono Chair, Los Angeles Office;
Member of the Firm's Diversity Committee
Member of Executive Board
Related Publications
Related News
If you are interested in having us represent you, you should call us so we can determine whether the matter is one for which we are willing or able to accept professional responsibility. We will not make this determination by e-mail communication. The telephone numbers and addresses for our offices are listed on this page. We reserve the right to decline any representation. We may be required to decline representation if it would create a conflict of interest with our other clients.
By accepting these terms, you are confirming that you have read and understood this important notice.