My Photo

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter

    September 2016

    Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
            1 2 3
    4 5 6 7 8 9 10
    11 12 13 14 15 16 17
    18 19 20 21 22 23 24
    25 26 27 28 29 30  

    « Murphy v. Kenneth Cole Comments | Main | Upcoming Las Vegas Wage and Hour Compliance Seminar »


    mary dumont

    In thinking about the argument and questions, it seems to me that a much bigger deal could have been made about distinction between 203 and 226.7. 203 is thirty days of wages for any failure of pay. This is a huge amount of money for any vioaltion. 226.7 is one hour of pay for missing potentially a thirty minute break, triple time. This is not unrelated to the harm if one thinks about the physical strain on low wage workeers (think farm, fast food, assembly line, etc.) of working without any break: literally back-breaking. If one compares it to time and half after eight hours, it seems quite appropriate. time and half assumes you have had a break and continuing is not a huge hardship, but no break is a huge hardship in certain lines of work.

    BTW: as always, you have rendered a huge service to your colleagues by thoughtfully sorting through the comments and distilling the information. Thanks.

    The comments to this entry are closed.

    Become a Fan

    AddThis Social Bookmark Button