DLSE Looking Again at Meal and Rest Period Regs

The Division of Labor Standards Enforcement (DLSE) will be holding a forum later this week in Sacramento and on a second date, to be determined, in Southern California, "to provide members of the public an opportunity to inform the newly appointed California State Labor Commissioner, Angela Bradstreet, of their concerns regarding how recent changes to the meal and rest period enforcement practices required by legislation and recent court decisions has impacted their daily work-lives."

The Sacramento hearings will be held on Thursday, August 2, 2007, from 9 a.m. to 2 p.m., at the Sacramento State Alumni Center, Capital Room, California State University, Sacramento, located at 6000 J. Street, Sacramento, California 95819.

All members of the public are invited to address the Labor Commissioner. Additionally, the Office of the Labor Commissioner will be accepting written comments received by the close of business on Friday, August 31, 2007. Written comments may be sent to:

Chief Counsel
Division of Labor Standards Enforcement
P.O. Box 420603
San Francisco, CA 94142

We suggest workers send written comments, pointing out that the Commissioner is unlikely to hear from real working class folks at a midweek, mid-workday hearing. If prior experience serves as a guide, there is a likelihood that the Chamber of Commerce and/or California Restaurant Association will be packing the room with workers paid or otherwise strongly encouraged to accompany them and testify against employee meal and rest periods.

Comments

[kent]

I'm confused about the agency's intent; what's the DLSE got to do with the "impact" of legislation and the Supreme Court's decision saying employers have to follow the existing law or pay penalties ("extra wages")?

The DLSE's "precedential decision" that 226.7 pay was a "penalty" got whacked directly and indirectly (as well as its policy to "defer" 226.7 claims). Can't it take a hint and simply enforce the law as written and explained?

It's not like the DLSE can actually get its act together to pass legitimate regulations in compliance with the administrative procedures act -- and these aren't hearings to do that, are they? They're the labor law enforcers, not the IWC (which is authorized to set the rules). So, what do you think is up?

Suppose the impact is as harsh as you can imagine -- you know, stories of employers force feeding employees who are on diets and can't stand to rest -- what's the DLSE going to do?

[lexicon]

How did it go?