The Washington Supreme Court case Brady v. Autozone recently addressed the standards that apply when a non-exempt employee alleges that an employer did not provide meal breaks. In short: it is now clear that if a lawsuit is brought, employers are likely to bear the burden to show that break laws have not been violated.[1]
Continue Reading The Washington Supreme Court Addresses Meal Break Claims
rest and meal period
California Supreme Court Clarifies Meal and Rest Break Requirements Under State Law
By Tony DeCristoforo on
In its long-anticipated decision in Brinker v. Superior Court, a unanimous California Supreme Court has clarified the scope of an employer’s obligation to provide meal and rest breaks to non-exempt employees in California. The Court’s full opinion is available here.
Meal Breaks
California law requires employers to provide employees with a meal period of not …
Our Festivus Present to Oregon Employers: Ten Things You Should Know for 2010
By Dennis Westlind on
Wow, it’s Festivus already, which means that in just a few short days it will be a brand new year! We have a Festivus present for Oregon employers to help you get ready: Ten things you need to know for 2010! (click on each blue hotlink for more information)
- All Oregon employers are required to post the SB
…