A Win for Employers in Brinker: Meal Periods in California Need Not Be Ensured, or Furnished on a Rolling Five-Hour Basis
April 13, 2012
By LESLIE ABBOTT, JEFFREY D. WOHL & HOLLY LAKE
After more than three years since review first was requested, the California Supreme Court rendered a unanimous decision yesterday in Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. Superior Court, No. S166350 (Apr. 12, 2012). For employers, the wait was worth it, as the court delivered a clean win on the two central legal issues: (1) what it means to provide a meal period, and (2) when a second meal period is due.
ADEA Changes: EEOC Muddles the RFOA Defense to Disparate-Impact Age Bias Claims
April 12, 2012