Publications

“Day of Rest” Requirement Measured By Workweek, Not Every Seven-Day Period

5/11/2017 Articles

California employers must allow their employees to take one day of rest per each workweek, unless they work less than 30 hours per week or each shift in that workweek is 6 hours or less, the California Supreme Court decided this week in Mendoza v. Nordstrom, Inc. The Court’s decision answered a Ninth Circuit question on California law raised in a suit brought on behalf of Nordstrom’s California employees, who alleged that they had been scheduled for shifts for more than six consecutive days. The Court also clarified the extent of an employer’s obligation to ensure their employees take a day of rest.

California “Day of Rest” Statute

The California Labor Code provides that “[e]very person employed in any occupation of labor is entitled to one day’s rest therefrom in seven,” and “[n]o employer of labor shall cause his employees to work more than six days in seven.” Cal. Labor Code §§ 551-52. The Ninth Circuit asked the California Supreme Court to consider whether these statutes applied on a week-by-week basis (e.g., the clock restarts every Monday) or on a rolling basis (measured by seven consecutive days, regardless of where they fall in the week).

The California Supreme Court determined that the text of the statute is “manifestly ambiguous” concerning the Ninth Circuit’s question. In examining the statute’s context with respect to IWC Wage Orders and the complete statutory scheme, however, the Court held that applying the “day of rest” provisions “on a weekly rather than a rolling basis…subjects employees and employers to a single set of consistent day of rest requirements, thereby facilitating the scheduling of work.” As the Labor Code defines a workweek, it means a “fixed and regularly recurring period” (e.g., Sunday to Saturday, or Monday to Sunday, not a rolling period of any seven consecutive days). Cal. Labor Code § 500 (b). Thus, under the state Supreme Court’s clarification of Sections 551 and 552, an employee could be lawfully scheduled for up to 12 consecutive days of work so long as that period covered two separate workweeks. For example, if the employer’s workweek ran Sunday-Saturday, an employee could be off work the first Sunday and work through the Friday of the following week.

Exemptions to the “Day of Rest” Law

Certain weekly schedules are exempt from these day of rest requirements. Labor Code Section 556 provides: “Sections 551 and 552 shall not apply to any employer or employee when the total hours of employment do not exceed 30 hours in any week or six hours in any one day thereof.” The Ninth Circuit also asked the Court to interpret this provision. The plaintiffs argued that the exemption should only apply if they worked six hours or less every single day of a workweek, while Nordstrom argued that the proper interpretation of the section exempted employees who worked six hours or less on one day in a workweek.

The Court agreed with the plaintiffs, finding Nordstrom’s proposed interpretation would render some of Section 556 superfluous, given that any employee who worked six hours/day for seven days would have worked 42 hours/week. The first half of Section 556 provides for a 30-hour work limit for those exempt from the “day of rest” rule. Employers should note that, although Section 554 was not addressed in Mendoza, that Section separately provides that agricultural employees covered by Wage Order 14 are exempt from the day of rest requirements, and all employees are exempt where the “nature of the employment reasonably requires” a seven-day schedule, so long as the employee receives the equivalent days of rest during the calendar month.

Employer Obligations to Ensure a Day of Rest

Finally, the Court concluded that employers need only “maintain absolute neutrality as to the exercise” of the right to a day of rest. “An employer may not encourage its employees to forgo rest or conceal the entitlement to rest, but is not liable simply because an employee chooses to work a seventh day.” So, employers should avoid scheduling seven-days within workweeks, and should honor an employee’s request to avoid working a seventh day within the workweek. But if employees volunteer to work a seventh consecutive day, they are permitted to do so.

Penalties

Violations of Sections 551 and 552 can lead to civil penalties of $50 per employee for each pay period for the first violation and $100/employee per pay period thereafter. See Cal. Labor Code § 558. A violations of the “day of rest” rules is also a criminal misdemeanor. Cal Labor Code § 553.

Conclusion

To ensure compliance with this interpretation of the Labor Code, California employers should examine their scheduling policies to ensure that employees who work over 30 hours/week or who work longer than six hours/day in any one week period are normally given one day off work per calendar week. The employee can choose whether or not to take the day, but cannot be pressured or encouraged to forego that day.

Firm Highlights

Publication

SEC Expands Definition of “Accredited Investor” – Here Are 5 Key Takeaways

The SEC recently adopted amendments to Rule 501(a) of Regulation D of the Securities Act of 1933 that expand the definition of “accredited investor” by adding new categories of eligibility based on professional knowledge...

Read More
Event

North Coast Cannabis Industry Conference

Farella Braun + Martel is a proud underwriter of the North Bay Business Journal's 2020 North Coast Cannabis Industry Conference series. This live virtual event will explore new opportunities and challenges to the medical...

Read More
News

Farella Braun + Martel Ranked Among “Best Law Firms” by U.S. News & World Report and Best Lawyers

SAN FRANCISCO, November 5, 2020: Farella Braun + Martel earned national and regional rankings across a number of practice areas in the U.S. News & World Report and Best Lawyers® release of the “Best...

Read More
Publication

SB 67 Moves California’s Cannabis Appellations Program Forward

In February of 2020, the California Department of Food & Agriculture (CDFA) issued its first iteration of the Cannabis Appellations Program (CAP) , which set forth proposed regulations for licensed cannabis cultivators to establish...

Read More
Publication

Privacy During Bankruptcy Proceedings: Why It Matters

During these particularly trying times resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic, businesses of all sizes have been concerned about the future. As a result, considering potential liquidation or restructuring through bankruptcy is inevitably starting to...

Read More
News

Farella’s Aviva Gilbert Honored With WWCDA Catherine M. O’Neil Mentoring Award

SAN FRANCISCO, November 19, 2020: Northern California legal powerhouse Farella Braun + Martel is pleased to announce that Aviva J. Gilbert will be honored by the Women's White Collar Defense Association (WWCDA) with its Catherine...

Read More
Event

Antitrust and Technology: Perspectives From In-House Competition Counsel

Chris Wheeler is the moderator for the Association of Corporate Counsel San Francisco Bay Area Chapter program "Antitrust and Technology: Perspectives from In-House Competition Counsel." Overview: As the COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the digital...

Read More
Event

Antitrust and Technology: Perspectives from In-House Competition Counsel

Chris Wheeler will moderate a panel in the discussion on "Antitrust and Technology: Perspectives from In-House Competition Counsel." As the COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the digital revolution, attention in Washington, D.C. and elsewhere has...

Read More
News

Year-End Planning After The Election: What Financial Advisors & Tax Pros Are Telling Clients About Future Tax Changes

Lauren Galbraith was quoted in the Forbes article "Year-End Planning After The Election: What Financial Advisors & Tax Pros Are Telling Clients About Future Tax Changes." Read the full article, here .

Read More
Publication

Electric Fence: Protecting Proprietary Rights in Collected Energy Data

Like companies in other industries, a growing number of modern energy-related companies are focusing their efforts on data collection and analysis. For example, Enphase – an energy technology company – regularly tracks data about how...

Read More