29 Apr PROSPECTIVE MEAL BREAK WAIVERS ARE ENFORCEABLE
Meal breaks are required in California when employees work more than five hours in a work day. However, Labor Code section 512 and the IWC Wage Orders permit employees to waive their meal break if they do not work more than six hours, so long as the waiver is by “mutual consent”. Many employers allow their employees to sign a blanket waiver during new hire orientation (or thereafter if rolled out later) that purports to waive in advance, the employee’s meal break on shifts between five and six hours, subject to the employee’s right to revoke the waiver.
In Bradsbery v. Vicar Operating, Inc. (B322799 4/21/25), the Court of Appeal held that such a prospective meal break waiver is consistent with both the statute and Wage Orders, and is fully enforceable. The Court affirmed the trial court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of the employer on the employee’s meal break claim based on the written waiver.
The Court rejected the plaintiff’s arguments that prospective meal break waivers effectively deprive employees their right to a meal break, and that such waivers are inconsistent with the Supreme Court’s decision in Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. Superior Court (2012) 53 Cal. 4th 1004. Rather, the Court found that the legislative and administrative history indicate the Legislature and the IWC did not intend to prohibit prospective written waivers of meal breaks. Further, Brinker did not consider the timing or circumstances of an employee’s meal break waiver.
Although the Court held the written waiver in this case was valid, it observed there could be a different result if there was evidence that the waiver was coerced or unconscionable. Nor did the Court rule on the validity of oral prospective meal break waivers, or waivers of second meal breaks on shifts between 10 and 12 hours.
Meal break claims continue to be a common claim in wage and hour class action and PAGA cases. At mediation, the validity of prospective blanket meal break waivers is frequently an important issue because the impact of waivers on potential meal break exposure can be significant. Although the Court of Appeal’s decision in Bradsbery may not be the last ruling on this issue, it will likely have a major impact on meal break litigation, including how such claims are evaluated at mediation.
