Required Lunch Break

Jewlolson22

We currently have an issue with our lunch break periods and pay. We run a call center with around 300 telephone ee's. The big issue is that the state of Nevada requires we administer a 30 minute lunch break for every 8 hours worked. Very standard. There are times when we are too busy for the employees to leave their work stations. Forcing some of the employees to eat at their work stations. I'm having a lot of trouble convincing my CEO and Payroll administrator that this is not a good business practice. Is there any one who can offer me some assistance to stand up for my ee's?

HRsage

In order for it to be considered a lunch "break" the ee's must not be doing any work. Whether they wish to stay at their workstations is up to them, they shouldn't feel forced to stay there and they should be allowed to leave the premises. The lunch time is their own time.

Your company needs to change this practice quickly.

lnelson

If the ee is working be it answering a phone,filing, etc. they are considered to be working and should be paid for it.

If they are just at their desk and not doing any work related tasks (i.e. reading a magazine, shopping on internet..etc) it is considered off the clock and would not be paid.

JM in ATL

A problem that you will eventually face that is bigger than a violation of state law (figuratively speaking) is low employee morale, job dissatisfaction, and high turnover.

Is it an option to cross train employees? Or hire some part time employees to work during lunch hours so that call volume/response time isn't effected?

Employees need a break from the phones and if you take away their lunch time, you are going to see an increased number of bathroom breaks, which get longer and smoke breaks, if that is allowed, etc. Which is going to cause other ee's to become resentful towards other ee's who abuse bathroom breaks.

I think not allowing your ee's to get up away from their desk and enjoy a break will ultimately effect your call volume/response time in a greater capcity than allowing an employee to take a 30 min break.

Just think how you would feel if you were told to work 8 hours in one spot with no breaks. What would you do about it? Me, I wouldn't work there.

lnelson

JM,
In my scenario it would be the ee's choice to sit at their desk. I am not advocating it but just saying if that is the case then depending on what they are doing would distinguish if paid or not.

Sorry for confusion.xflash
Lisa

Pork

Fed Regulation 785.18 &.19 gives you the specific words that you need in order to shoot down this practice. "Bona Fide meal periods do not include coffee breaks or time for snacks and etc. The employee must be completely relieved from duty for the purposes of eating a regular meal. Ordinarily 30 minutes or more is long enough for a bona fide meal break......The employee is not relieved if he/she is required to preform any duties, whether active or inactive, while eating. For exsample, an office employee is required to eat at his/her desk or a factory worker who is required to remain at his machine while he/she eats IS WORKING WHILE EATING".

In these case you must allow them to accumalate regular hours and O/T hours depending on your designated work week or shift. All shifts working greater than 6 hours a day will be involved with a required meal break. Weekly we have an on-site working task that last longer than 6 hours, once we start it we don't stop until the work task has been completed and passed the inspection. After which the employee can take a meal break or he/she may go home. All of the working hours are regular hours worked unless over 40 and then all hours worked fall under the O/T rules. If we as a company fail to recognize the need for the employee to have a meal break, then the company will be looked upon as abusive to the employee. If the employee is made to sit at their work station and eat, you can bet on down the line of days worked, there will be a disqrunted employee who will make a complaint and produce on her desk calendar the exact dates and hours she was made to stay at her/his desk during lunch. Guess what you just bought, because you will have no evidence showing why you made them eat at their work site and the employee has all of the evidence regardless of the not so valid appearance of the ee's document. Your documents will do nothing but support the ee's case because you took out the lunch break instead of paying for that time when they were not in total control of their 30 minutes for a meal break!

Hunter1

I didn't read into your post that you're not either paying or willing to pay for the lunch breaks when the employees are required to stay at their desks. If Nevada has a law requiring employees to have a lunch break, research the law and point out to your superiors what the penalties are for noncompliance. That should get their attention.

Cinderella

Just tell 'em you have one word for them: WALMART. Their legal troubles with not paying workers for overtime / work performed are pretty ugly.

If ee's are working they need to be paid, period. If the call center is too busy for ee's to take a lunch then more ee's need to be hired or more need to be scheduled for the same shift.

I shudder to think what else is going on there if the CEO thinks this practice is okay....

deniseE

Our call center has about the same number of ee's as yours...we start rolling lunch breaks at about 11:30 and end about 1:30 so that the phones are always open...and yes, it may be busier during the lunch hour...but we still have people on the phones!

Another option may be to hire some part-time floaters for the lunch hours...say 10-2....we have a few of those as well..