Costly meal break lawsuit against Brinkley

The decision made by the California Supreme Court to step into a watched lawsuit against Brinker International Inc over its employee rest and meal breaks would have profound and costly effect on the state's employers.

A San Diego appeals court's opinion favored Brinker's position that the company had to make available meal and breaks but not to ensure they were taken. It was hailed by employers and adopted as law by the state labor commission.
The high court though had agreed to investigate workers' claims that managers at Brinker's Chili and Romano's Macaroni Grills had pressured them to waive their breaks by under staffing the restaurant or by threatening to change or cut their hours.

The supreme court will also review the appeals courts' refusal to grant the more than 100,000 present and past Brinker workers class action status to pursue the claims.

Brinker could pay over $100 million in damages if the class action is certified and workers win th trail, Tracee Lorens, their lawyer said on Friday.

Brinker said that the appeals court ruling was correct and that the supreme court review “presents a good opportunity to provide clarity and direction to these matters.”

Exposing companies' take on workers

The decision to re investigate the ruling doesn't mean that the high court is likely to overturn it. But it would put California employers on notice to keep their records of worker breaks until case is decided, said Attorney Enzo Der Boghossia, representing the management meal and rest break cases.

"Until the Supreme Court decision is issued, employers who don't make sure that meal breaks are taken and recorded are exposing themselves" to potential liability, Der Boghossian, of Proskauer Rose LLP in Los Angeles, said.

The case has been closely watched by state employers and "has the potential to change the daily routines of all hourly workers in California" by tying the hands of both employers and hourly workers with regard to scheduling, Der Boghossian said.