In
Donohue v. AMN Services,
LLC, the California Supreme Court held that where
employees time records reflect a missed, late or short meal
break, a rebuttable presumption arises that a proper
meal break was not provided. This decision significantly alters the
burden of proof on meal break claims, and will make it easier for
plaintiffs to obtain class certification and prove liability.
The Court gave guidance about how
employers can rebut the presumption, including by incorporating a
dropdown menu in timekeeping systems that require employees to give
the reason for a noncompliant break.
The Court also held that employers
may not use rounded time to determine if a meal break was short or
To embed, copy and paste the code into your website or blog:
On January 14, 2021, the California Supreme Court held that the ABC Test, as articulated in
Dynamex, applies retroactively to claims under California’s Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Orders.
ABC Test Background
In 2018, in notable
Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court, the California Supreme Court held that for purposes of compliance with California’s IWC wage orders, workers are presumed employees, unless the hiring entity proves ALL of the following under the so called “ABC” test:
(A) the worker is free from the control and direction of the hiring entity in connection with the performance of the work, both under the contract for the performance of the work and in fact; and