A California Court of Appeal just handed employers a wage and hour win by ruling that meal period waivers prospectively signed by nonexempt employees are enforceable if certain criteria are met. The April 21 decision in Bradsbery v. Vicar Operating Inc. provides employers with a solid game plan to approach meal period waivers at their workplaces. Below is a quick review of the case and four steps you should consider to take advantage of this positive decision and get the most out of your meal period waivers.

How We Got Here and Why It Matters

In Bradsbery v. Vicar Operating Inc., the two plaintiffs — La Kimba Bradsbery and Cheri Brakensiek — formerly worked for a network of veterinary hospitals, Vicar Operating Inc., and alleged that it violated California wage and hour law. They launched a class-action lawsuit against their former employer arguing that it improperly handled their meal periods.

• They alleged Vicar required them and others to work five- to six-hour shifts without providing a duty-free 30-minute meal period — and therefore should have paid them “premiums” for missed meal periods.
• A “premium” under California law is a sort of penalty calculated as one hour of pay at the employee’s regular rate of pay.
• In the class-action context, the potential exposure arising out of these meal period claims can be significant.

The Arguments in a Nutshell

In its defense, Vicar argued that Bradsbery, Brakensiek, and all other similar employees waived their right to these...

Read Full Story: https://news.google.com/rss/articles/CBMixAFBVV95cUxNTnFpWHNveEFNTEladEd6UnFj...