Most employers have long known that California’s Wage Orders require employers to relieve non-exempt employees of all duties during meal periods. Because the Wage Orders do not specifically state that employers must relieve non-exempt employees of all duties during rest breaks, however, many have believed that it was not necessary to do so, and that non-exempt employees could be required to remain “on call” during rest breaks. The California Supreme Court’s recent decision in Augustus v. ABM Security, Inc. debunks that proposition and confirms that employers must relieve non-exempt employees of all duties during rest breaks, just as they do during meal periods.
In Augustus, thousands of current and former security guards claimed in a class action lawsuit that ABM Security had failed to consistently provide uninterrupted rest breaks to them. Instead, the company required its security guards to monitor their radios and pagers during rest periods, to “remain vigilant,” and to respond as needs arose.
The company argued that employees commonly engaged in activities such as reading, smoking and making personal phone calls during rest breaks, and emphasized that the applicable Wage Order requires that non-exempt employees be “relieved of all duties” during meal periods, but contains no similar requirement with respect to rest breaks The California Supreme Court sided with the employees, concluding that California prohibits “on call” rest breaks and requires employers to relinquish all control over non-exempt employees during rest breaks.
The Court particularly focused the practical realities of a ten-minute rest break, noting that the limitations on movement caused by the short duration of rest breaks, together with the obligation to remain on-call imposed by ABM Security upon its guards, combine to force employees to remain “ready and capable of being summoned to action,” which the Court found “irreconcilable” with employees’ freedom to use rest periods for their own needs. As the Court plainly stated, “A rest period, in short, must be a period of rest.”
While the Supreme Court insisted that non-exempt employees must be relieved of all duties during rest breaks, it also emphasized that nothing in its decision prohibits an employer from “reasonably rescheduling” a non-exempt employee’s rest period when the need arises.
What Should Employers Do Now?
- Ensure that supervisors permit non-exempt employees to take uninterrupted rest breaks for every four hours of work, or major fraction thereof. If an employee cannot be relieved of all duty during a scheduled break, consider whether the employee should be paid for a full hour at her regular rate of pay or be given another 10-minute rest period.
- If necessary, update your Employee Handbook to confirm that employees are fully relieved of all work-related duties during rest periods.
If you have any questions about the Augustus decision, meal and rest breaks, or any other issue relating to employment law, please contact one of our attorneys.