My Photo

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter

    December 2013

    Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5 6 7
    8 9 10 11 12 13 14
    15 16 17 18 19 20 21
    22 23 24 25 26 27 28
    29 30 31        

    « Brinker Statement of Issues | Main | After Remand, Gentry Arbitration Petition is Denied »

    TrackBack

    TrackBack URL for this entry:
    http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451c66069e2010535bcdcfb970c

    Listed below are links to weblogs that reference DLSE Withdraws July 2008 "Brinker Memo":

    Comments

    Jon Storm

    This is absurd. I know we are living in an era of increasing lawlessness—I get that. But who does this help? The employee who is wink-wink'd out of his lunches, or the employer who thinks, under current law, he doesn't have a responsibility to do so, only to find out that's not the law and he had be hit with a huge lawsuit?

    Gevalt.

    You don't need a Harvard law degree to figure this out:

    LC 512 requires that employers provide employees with a 30-minute meal break when they work more than 5 hours a day.

    LC 512 also gives employees the right to waive their meal break if they work no more than 6 hours a day - and the employer agrees.

    If it was the intent of the legislature to allow employees to waive meal breaks when they work 6.5 hours, 7.0 hours, 8.0 hours or ALWAYS, that would have been written into the law.

    LC 512 as a health & safety, protection statute for employees. I openly recognize some employees would like to work 8, 9, or 10 hours straight without taking a meal break - thus allowing them to finish their job quicker and go home earlier. However, LC 512 protects employees from their own stupidity. It is akin to the construction worker who finds wearing a safety belt cumbersome and constricting. The law gives the employee the right not to wear a safety harness when working below some specified height, but the refusal to wear safety equipment is not absolute. It is the employers repsonsibility to FORCE the employee to wear the safety harness when working over XX feet - otherwise the employer is subject to stiff fines and penalties. LC 512 operates the same way.

    Did I miss something, or did Angela Bradstreet backdate her July memo to the 22nd?

    Verify your Comment

    Previewing your Comment

    This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

    Working...
    Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
    Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

    The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

    As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

    Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

    Working...

    Post a comment

    Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

    Become a Fan

    AddThis Social Bookmark Button