Salazar v. See's Candy Shops, Incorporated - B300778

 The Second Appellate District affirmed a trial court's denial of class certification.  In general, under California law employees are entitled to meal breaks of 30 minutes if the shift lasts over 5 hours and a second break if the shift lasts over 10 hours.  The plaintiff alleged See's Candy Shops denied its employees the second break, pointing to See's Candy's scheduling form, which did not contain a column to schedule a second meal break and time clock records which showed that employees did not clock-out for the second break 2/3rds of the time. 

The court reasoned that the trial court appropriately denied class certification because individual issues would dominate at a trial.  Under California law, the employees could voluntarily decline to take a meal break.  And while a lack of records created a rebuttable presumption that a break was denied, the defendant was prepared to submit individualized evidence that breaks were offered.  In deciding whether certification was appropriate, the court is not limited to considering plaintiff's evidence.  The defendant has a right to present potentially meritorious defenses and, if that evidence would result in individual issues predominating at trial, then certification can be denied. 

As a practical matter, this decision benefits employers by making it less likely plaintiffs will obtain class certification on the issue of missed meal breaks.

Even where a meal break is offered or taken, an employer risks liability for not keeping adequate records showing breaks were timely offered and taken.  (See Wage Order 5, Sec. 7 (A)(3).)  The better practice is for employers to always document that a meal break was offered and voluntarily waved.