While the general consensus from talking to other employment attorneys prior to the decision was that Kenneth Cole would win, the Court did the right thing and held for Murphy. Although the Defendants probably don’t see it this way, this was actually the best decision for employers. Had the Court held the other way, the biggest problem is that it would have criminalized having employees work through lunch. kenneth cole rado That is, if the Meal Premium was a penalty, then it would be because the conduct was illegal. To see why this would be a problem, we can look at how overtime is treated. Overtime is treated as a wage, rather than a penalty. Thus, an employer can require an employee to work overtime, provided he pays the additional premium. The employee can not refuse to work overtime as overtime work is legal — as long as it is paid. An employee can refuse to work overtime (or any time for that matter) if the employer refuses to pay the proper wage. Thus, if an employee is fired for refusing to work for less than minimum wage, this is a wrongful termination. However, if an employee refuse to work overtime and the employer has a policy of paying for such overtime, the termination is legal.
Now, if meal breaks were required and any violation of them was illegal, then an employee could not be terminated for refusing to work through a meal break. kenneth cole rado In addition, any employer who required an employee to work through a meal period would be guiltily of a misdemeanor under Cal. Lab. Code ยง 553. Thus, had the Court decided in Kenneth Cole’s favor, I think you would have a large number of issues around the illegality of working through meal breaks.