Legal Opinion

Araquistain v. Pacific Gas & Electric Company

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 27, 2014No. A138487PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

RIVERA, J.

With certain exceptions, California’s Labor Code 1 requires an employer to provide to an employee who works more than five hours “a meal period of not less than 30 minutes.” (§ 512, subd. (a).) This provision does not apply to an employee of an electrical or gas corporation who is covered by a valid collective bargaining agreement that, inter alia, “expressly provides for meal periods for those employees.” (§ 512, subd. (e); see id., subd. (f)(4).) The question before us is whether a contract that provides that employees who work shifts of eight consecutive hours “shall be…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 2012
  2. Murphy v. Kenneth Cole Productions, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2007
  3. Tidewater Marine Western, Inc. v. BradshawCalifornia Supreme Court · 1996
  4. Kirby v. Immoos Fire Protection, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2012
  5. Delaney v. BakerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1999

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Vasserman v. Henry Mayo Newhall Memorial HospitalDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2014
  2. Vaquero v. Stoneledge Furniture, LLCCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2017
  3. George Huerta v. Csi Elec. Contractors, IncCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2022
  4. Carlos Marquez v. Toll Global Forwarding USACourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2020
  5. Danny Balvaneda, on behalf of others similarly situated v. PKL Services, Inc.; and Does 1 through 50, inclusiveDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2025

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API