BILL ANALYSIS �
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 1360|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: SB 1360
Author: Padilla (D)
Amended: As introduced
Vote: 21
SENATE LABOR & INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMITTEE : 3-1, 3/26/14
AYES: Hueso, Leno, Padilla
NOES: Wyland
NO VOTE RECORDED: Yee
SUBJECT : Compensation: meal and rest or recovery periods
SOURCE : California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation
California Teamsters Public Affairs Council
DIGEST : This bill clarifies that a legally mandated rest or
recovery period is counted as hours worked and, therefore, shall
not result in any deductions from an employees wages, as
specified.
ANALYSIS :
Existing law establishes, within the Department of Industrial
Relations, the following entities:
1. Industrial Welfare Commission (IWC): to regulate employee
wages, hours and working conditions.
2. Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA):
tasked with the responsibility of protecting workers and the
CONTINUED
SB 1360
Page
2
public from safety hazards through its various programs.
3. Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board (OSHSB): to
adopt reasonable and enforceable standards at least as
effective as federal standards.
4. Division of Labor Standards Enforcement: to adjudicate wage
claims, investigate discrimination and public works
complaints, and enforce Labor Code and the IWC orders.
Existing law, with certain exceptions, defines a day's work as
eight hours of labor. Any additional hours worked in excess of
eight hours in one day, or a 40-hour workweek, must be
compensated with the payment of overtime.
Regarding meal, rest and recovery periods, existing law requires
the following:
1. Meal Periods . An employer may not employ a worker for a
period of more than five hours per day without providing the
employee with a meal period of not less than 30 minutes,
except that if the total work period per day is no more than
six hours, the meal period may be waived by mutual consent of
both parties. A second 30 minute meal period is required if
an employee works more than ten hours per day, except if
total hours worked is no more than 12, the second meal period
may be waived by mutual consent only if the first meal period
was not waived. Unless an employee is relieved of all duty
during his/her meal period, the period shall be considered
"on duty" and counted as hours worked which must be
compensated at his/her regular rate of pay.
2. Rest Periods . IWC Wage Orders require that employers
authorize and permit nonexempt employees to take a rest
period that must, insofar as practicable, be taken in the
middle of each work period. The rest period is based on the
total hours worked and must be at the minimum rate of a net
10 consecutive minutes for each four-hour work period, or
major fraction thereof. A rest period is not required for
employees whose total daily work time is less than 3.5 hours.
According to the IWC wage orders, authorized rest periods
are counted as time worked and therefore, must be paid by the
employer.
CONTINUED
SB 1360
Page
3
3. Recovery Periods . A recovery period is defined as a
cool-down period afforded to nonexempt employees to prevent
heat illness. Employees are authorized and encouraged to
take a cool-down recovery rest period in the shade for a
period of no less than five minutes if they feel the need to
protect themselves from overheating.
Existing law prohibits an employer from requiring employees to
work during a meal or rest or recovery period mandated pursuant
to an applicable statute, regulations, standard, or order of the
IWC, the OSHSB, or Cal/OSHA. Failure to provide an employee
with a meal, rest or recovery period, entitles the employee to
one additional hour of pay at his/her regular rate of
compensation for each workday that the meal, rest or recovery
period is not provided.
This bill specifies that a rest or recovery period mandated
pursuant to state law, including, but not limited to, an
applicable statute, regulation, standard, or order of the IWC,
the OSHSB, or Cal/OSHA, shall be counted as hours worked, for
which there shall be no deduction from wages. This bill also
makes this provision declaratory of existing law.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No Local:
No
SUPPORT : (Verified 3/26/14)
California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation (co-source)
California Teamsters Public Affairs Council (co-source)
California Conference Board of the Amalgamated Transit Union
California Conference of Machinists
Engineers & Scientists of CA, IFPTE Local 20, AFL-CIO
International Longshore and Warehouse Union
Professional & Technical Engineers, IFPTE Local 21, AFL-CIO
Utility Workers Union of America, Local 132
UNITE-HERE, AFL-CIO
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the sponsors, this bill
corrects a drafting error made in the final amendments to SB 435
(Padilla, Chapter 719, Statutes of 2013) which inadvertently
removed language stating that daily rest periods and heat
stress-related recovery periods are "to be counted as hours
worked, for which there shall be no deduction from wages." The
CONTINUED
SB 1360
Page
4
sponsors argue that prior to its final amendments, SB 435 sought
to: (1) provide the same protections and remedies for heat
stress-related recovery periods as apply to daily rest periods;
(2) clarify that piece rate workers are entitled to be paid
their average piece rate earnings during their daily rest and
recovery periods; and, (3) codify existing law which holds that
these periods are to be considered compensated time.
The sponsors state that as SB 435 moved through the legislative
process, a California appellate court's decision in Bluford v
Safeway affirmed that piece rate workers were entitled to be
paid during their rest periods. The Safeway defendants sought
review of this decision in the CA Supreme Court, which later
denied the petition for review, letting Bluford stand. The
sponsors argue, prior to the Supreme Court's action, they had
removed the section of the bill that attempted to codify the
required pay during these periods in order to clear the way for
a possible Supreme Court consideration of the issue. They argue
this bill simply restores this language and clarifies that
workers are to be compensated for taking a cool down recovery
period.
PQ:d 3/26/14 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED