Punch in and out for lunch break

Roman · March 2007

Normally, hourly (nonexempt) employees do not punch the clock (clock out and in) for lunch.

Our pay/time keeping system automatically deducts a half hour from the normally assigned shift because we do not pay lunch. Employees are present for 8.5 hours and are paid for eight. We only ask people to punch out and in for lunch if they leave the premises.

I have been advised that the latest FLSA rules would require punch out and in for every lunch regardless of what the employees do. If employees choose to work through lunch and the system automaically does not pay lunch, there could be a problem.

I don't agree with this. Our policy states that employees are expected to take a half hour for lunch. We should not have to require punch out and in to prove that the employee took a required unpaid lunch break.

Does anyone else see it this way?? If the employee does work through lunch, it would be only through supervisor's approval and would be by way of exception.

Roman in Michigan

stilldazed · March 2007

I hear what you are saying and can see both sides. I think the warning to require employees to punch in and out is in case you are challenged. You can have a policy that says employees will take a break and let the timeclock automatically dock the meal time, but if a worker claims he/she was required to work some or all of the time, the worker's word will carry weight over an auto-deduct. The reverse situation, however, typically requires more mgmt time to ensure that workers are doing what they should be doing in a most efficient manner (i.e., not standing around the timeclock waiting for the magic window). You can let your timeclock make the auto-deduction, but there are inherent risks in doing so. Just be prepared for the risks, such as having evidence in place somewhere that the policy is policed and enforced consistently.

Best wishes.

CarmenSuterTN · March 2007

We have the same type of policy and a timeclock that automatically makes the deduction as well. However, we also require that the employee physically punch in and out. It is for consistency and accountability. We have had a few instances of employees saying we have not given them a break and it was automatically deducted, which docked their pay, and they were due the time, which was conveniently overtime. Thank goodness we had surveillance to prove this was an bogus complaint.

E Wart · May 2007

About 3 of our plants do like you say and the rest (about 4) clock in/out. I personally prefer that there is "clocking in/out" because otherwise how can you prove except ones' word against another. If you have a disgruntled employee who leaves and goes to the DOL, they can say they were never paid for the time they worked during lunch, DOL looks at your time cards, and you have to prove you are right, because looks like you owe employee additional OT as well as penalities. I asked DOL once, they said clocking in/out is better, but they don't require it.
(By the way, we had an older employee die of a heart attach while sitting at his work station eating lunch. They didn't clock out at this location. Luckily we had a very understanding family and they didn't put it being on working hours, but certainly could have (especially since he was siting at work station and never clocked out.)
If you have a choice, DO it.
E Wart

Elizabetharess · May 2007

I just posted another question about punching in an out. It is about coming to work early and waiting to punch in.
Based on all the information and our "Murphy's Law" syndrome, I guess it is best to have the employees punch in and out, my reluctance is the missed punches in and out which just increases the headache of payroll.
I hope others respond to this.
Thanks
Elizabeth

ritaanz · May 2007

Right now we do not have time clocks. The employees fill out a daily time sheet and at the top indicate start time, lunch time and end time.

If they work through lunch, which is very, very rare, they must write in No Lunch or Worked through Lunch.

Down the road, we plan on clocks that will also track jobs and costing. They will probably be required to punch in and out for lunch.

DianeZ · June 2007

We are a manufacturing plant with 80 employees. We require people to punch in at the beginning of the day and punch out at the end of the day - using the timeclock. We do not require punching in and out for their 1/2 hour lunch. Everyone is required to take a 1/2 hour uninterrupted lunch. If they do not, they are to write "no lunch" on their daily time card. I would then question this with their supervisor who would speak with the employee and try to ensure that they get the "uninterrupted" 1/2 lunch in the future! I, also, worry though about getting burnt on this. I am strongly considering the punch in and out for lunch because of liability issues.

dls · June 2007

I just researched this issue. The DOL handbook addresses "long punching"--when employees clock in before start time. The handbook says an auditor should recommend but not require that the time per the time clock more accurately reflect the time actually worked. The handbook does not address the lunch issue.

Based upon the "long punching" advice in the handbook, I advised the employer to post a sign near the time clock that states that the clock will automatically deduct 30 minutes for lunch and that employees should report if they have worked during their lunch break. An adjustment sheet should be available for reporting such discrepancies. This calls into play policies regarding overtime, preapproval, etc.

I also spoke with a DOL representative. He agreed this should be adequate. [Of course, how much help will this be if we get audited or involved in an FLSA suit?]

The overreaching idea is to have ACCURATE time records. I think the posted sign and the adjustment sheet idea should work.

Punch in and out for lunch break

Comments