Employees Catch A (Meal) Break From The Oregon Supreme Court

LM
Littler Mendelson

Contributor

With more than 1,800 labor and employment attorneys in offices around the world, Littler provides workplace solutions that are local, everywhere. Our diverse team and proprietary technology foster a culture that celebrates original thinking, delivering groundbreaking innovation that prepares employers for what’s happening today, and what’s likely to happen tomorrow
On April 23, 2020, the Oregon Supreme Court declined to review a ruling by the Oregon Court of Appeals in which employers were held to a standard of "strict liability" for failing to ensure that non-exempt employees take their full 30-minute meal breaks.
United States Employment and HR
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.

On April 23, 2020, the Oregon Supreme Court declined to review a ruling by the Oregon Court of Appeals in which employers were held to a standard of "strict liability" for failing to ensure that non-exempt employees take their full 30-minute meal breaks.

In Maza v. Waterford Operations, LLC, current and former employees brought a class action lawsuit against their employer seeking penalty wages for allegedly shortened meal periods. The employer argued the case was not suited for class action treatment because, while employers are required to provide a 30-minute meal period, there are times when the employer cannot guarantee that employees take their full meal period, such as when employees work remotely or voluntarily return to work before the full 30 minutes have elapsed. The trial court agreed with the employer's argument, and the employees appealed to the Oregon Court of Appeals.

The Oregon Court of Appeals agreed with the class of employees, ruling that the minimum meal period prescribed by Oregon Administrative Rule 839-020-00501 is "mandatory" and, in the absence of a waiver of the meal period as provided in OAR 839-020-0050(8), an employer of non-exempt employees must require a 30-minute meal period free of all work duties. The Court of Appeals noted it was an employer's duty to exercise control over its employees to ensure full 30-minute meal periods are taken and that employers face "strict liability" for failing to ensure that employees take the full meal break.

The employer appealed the Oregon Court of Appeals' ruling, but the Oregon Supreme Court declined to review the ruling, which means that Oregon employers will continue to face strict liability for failing to ensure that their employees take full 30-minute meal breaks.

In light of the significant burdens imposed by the Maza case, Oregon employers should review their policies and practices around employee meal breaks and consult experienced labor and employment counsel with any questions.

Footnotes

1 OAR 839-020-0050(2)(a) provides: "Except as otherwise provided in this rule, every employer shall provide to each employee, for each work period of not less than six or more than eight hours, a meal period of not less than 30 continuous minutes during which the employee is relieved of all duties."

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More