Starbucks to Pay Workers $3 Million Class Action Settlement Over Missed Breaks

On May 13, 2013, Starbucks agreed to pay $3 million to resolve a class action lawsuit accusing the company of several wage and hour violations, including denying employees required meal breaks, issuing inaccurate wage statements, and preventing employees from collecting their accurate payments.

The Starbucks wage settlement will end a five-year-long class action lawsuit from Starbucks workers who stated they were denied off-duty breaks because the coffeehouse was too busy and understaffed, despite a company policy mandating they take breaks.

Former barista and shift supervisor Summer York originally filed the class action lawsuit in December 2008, had said Starbucks managed to get around their written meal and rest break policies through its automated labor scheduling system, management bonus structure, and various customer service imperatives. This caused workers to be reluctant in taking their own breaks.

Class Members of the Starbucks employee class action settlement include cafe attendants, baristas and shift supervisors who worked for Starbucks’ California locations between December 2, 2007 and January 2013. The plaintiffs alleged the company’s ‘two-partner rule’ prevented the employees from taking uninterrupted meal breaks, as required by state law. By company regulation, when only two employees are present on shift, company policy dictated that neither could leave their station for breaks, forcing them to take on-duty meal breaks, according to the suit.

The class action settlement agreement is expected to be signed by May 22, according to Friday’s motion.

Currently, for California state law, meal period violations are very common. A proper, lawful meal period is 30 minutes long, and the employee cannot perform any work-related obligations during those 30 minutes periods. Employees are entitled to a meal period if they work more than five hours at a time, and are entitled to a second meal period if they work more than 10 hours at a time.

If an employee misses the meal period, has to make work-related phone calls, or run work-related errands during their designated meal period, he or she is entitled to one hour of extra pay. Notably, California employers must keep records of each meal period each non-exempt employee takes extending back to three years. These records usually are in the form of time cards, showing when each employee clocked out for lunch and clocked back in afterward. If an employer cannot produce these records, the employer must present some other form of evidence that their employees received their meal breaks.