United Parcel Serv., Inc. v. Superior Court, 192 Cal. App. 4th 1043 (2011)

Pursuant to Labor Code § 226.7(b), “[i]f an employer fails to provide an employee a meal period or rest period… the employer shall pay the employee one additional hour of pay at the employee’s regular rate of compensation for each work day that the meal or rest period is not provided.” In this case, UPS argued that only one premium payment is allowable per work day regardless of the number or type of breaks that were not provided. The trial court disagreed with UPS, and the company filed a petition for writ of mandate challenging the trial court’s ruling. Relying upon an unpublished federal district court opinion, the Court of Appeal denied the petition for writ of mandate, holding that employees may recover up to two additional hours of pay on a single work day for meal period and rest break violations – one for failure to provide a meal period and another for failure to provide a rest period. See also Tien v. Tenet Healthcare Corp., 192 Cal.App.4th 1055 (2011) (trial court properly denied class certification for missed meal periods and rest breaks, following Brinker/Brinkley’s “provide not ensure” standard); Coleman v. Estes Express Lines, Inc., 631 F.3d 1010 (9th Cir. 2011) (district court is limited to consideration of the complaint in determining whether to remand wage-and-hour class action that was removed to federal court under the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005).