Employer’s Hot Meal Deal: It Doesn’t Have to Provide One

Q Is an employer required to make hot lunches available on the job, or is a lunchroom with vending machines adequate?

--M.S., Buena Park

*

A Actually, an employer does not have to provide any lunch to employees. They can be required to provide their own food.

All an employer has to do is provide an unpaid lunch period of at least 30 minutes to employees who work a full eight-hour workday. If an employer requires employees to eat on the premises, it must also provide a suitable eating place.

A lunchroom with vending facilities is more than an employer is obliged to provide.

--Michael A. Hood

Employment law attorney

Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker

Upgrading Job Classification Q I am considered support staff to a small group of mid-level managers. Since I know my job well and often help train new managers, I feel that my qualifications are far beyond simple support staff.

I am thinking of initiating a proposal for my own promotion. What is the best way to make my case?

--J.R., El Segundo

*

A If you are regularly performing tasks that are not in your current job description, particularly higher-level tasks such as training managers, then some sort of upgrading of your job classification or promotion may indeed be appropriate.

The first step is to approach your supervisor and voice your concerns to determine if your supervisor will support you. In many organizations, it is appropriate for your supervisor to initiate this sort of job review process. In any case, the support of your supervisor would be helpful.

Alternatively, you should talk to the person in charge of personnel issues at your company to find out what your options are. Even if it is impossible for the company to give you a promotion, the fact that you may be doing tasks that are not in your job description should be addressed, and you should be appropriately recognized for your work in this area.

--Ron Riggio

Director, Kravis Leadership Institute

Claremont McKenna College

Paying an Employee on Jury Duty Q Before this year, our company provided letters to our employees when they received a jury summons stating that the company did not pay for employees to serve on jury duty. Now our company has been acquired by another company, which gives employees paid time off for vacations, sick days, bereavement and jury duty.

Is a company obligated to pay for an employee to serve on jury duty? If so, how is it determined which companies are obligated to send their employees and pay for their days there? Can a company require employees to use paid time off days for jury duty?

--H.N., Hawthorne

*

A California law prohibits an employer from discriminating against an employee (for example, by firing or demoting him or her) for serving on a jury. However, it does not require that the employer pay the employee for time spent on jury duty.

Since employers are not obligated to pay for jury service, if they nonetheless choose to do so they are permitted to impose reasonable conditions on such pay. A requirement that an employee use paid time off days before becoming eligible for paid jury service would appear to be lawful.

--James J. McDonald Jr.

Attorney, Fisher & Phillips

Labor law instructor, UC Irvine

Salaried-to-Hourly Status Change Q Recently I was changed from salaried to hourly status. I was told this was in the interest of “uniformity.” My pay rate was reduced when calculated on an hourly basis, but my employer said I could make it up by being paid for overtime.

This development has hurt my morale. Several co-workers and I are in the same boat. I would appreciate your ideas on this.

--P.O., Whittier

*

A This move by your employer makes me wonder whether you might have been entitled to overtime while you were salaried. One of the biggest misconceptions in the workplace is that being salaried eliminates any overtime claims.

It does not matter what your job title was or what the employer called you. What matters is your actual job assignment. There is a very good chance that the employer might owe you overtime compensation for the last three years--the statute of limitations for claiming overtime--if your duties haven’t changed.

If your employer reduced the compensation of all employees, whether they were salaried or not, then the action may be legitimate. However, simply lowering the compensation of those who are now being allowed to receive overtime pay appears to be illegal. If you complain about it, it is also illegal for your employer to fire you or otherwise retaliate against you.

But you face a practical dilemma. Even though the law is on your side, if you complain there is a good chance you may alienate your boss, particularly if you also claim overtime for the last three years.

Remember, however, that every day you wait to pursue your rights, you are waiving a possible claim of overtime from three years ago.

--Don D. Sessions

Employee rights attorney

Mission Viejo