Labor and Employment Law Alert: Washington Meal and Rest Break Update
6/1/2004

On June 2, 2004, the Washington Supreme Court declined to review White v. Salvation Army, 118 Wn.App. 272 (Div.1, Sept. 8, 2003), the first Court of Appeals’ decision to address the meaning of the term "rest break" as required by WAC 296-126-092. That decision is now final and provides employers with helpful guidance on rest and meal break issues which have been the subject of intensive statewide litigation.

Adopting the position of the Washington State Attorney General and the Washington Department of Labor and Industries, the Court in Salvation Army, held:

• Meal breaks may be interrupted. If this occurs, the employee must be paid for the meal period without regard to the interruptions.

• Employees who already receive paid meal periods are not entitled to extra pay if their meal periods are interrupted.

• An employer has no affirmative duty to schedule a meal break. The employer’s only obligation is to allow the employee to take a meal break within the timeframes specified by Washington Administrative Code.

• Rest breaks do not have to be scheduled if the employee’s job permits the employee to take intermittent breaks totaling ten minutes for each four hours worked.

• An employer can require employees to remain on the premises during their paid rest breaks.

• An employee may remain on call during the employee’s rest break provided that the underlying purpose of the rest break, relief from work or exertion, is not compromised. Thus, if the employee is free to eat, rest, make personal phone calls, engage in non-work related conversation, or otherwise attend to personal business while the employee is on call, this will satisfy Washington’s rest break requirements.

• Intermittent rest breaks can be interrupted so long as employees have an opportunity to complete their break at some later point after the interruption.

We expect to see other cases which will further define the boundaries of rest and meal breaks for nonexempt employees, and employers should therefore continue to carefully monitor developments in this area.