In re: Taco Bell Wage and Hour Actions, case number 1:07-cv-01314 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California.
In the ongoing Taco Bell litigation, which began in 2007, Taco Bell workers are seeking partial summary judgment on their claim that the company failed to provide workers with the requisite two rest breaks for shifts over six hours.
Throughout the litigation, the workers have relied largely on a “Required Meal and Rest Break Matrix” that states that workers are allowed only one 10-minute break for shifts lasting up to seven hours. The company, however, has long argued that there is no proof this “Matrix” was a ever adopted as a company-wide policy. In fact, Taco Bell has produced evidence that 69% of the class members never even received a copy of the “Matrix.” Taco Bell has also contested plaintiffs’ claims by introducing punch cards that show that class members took second meal breaks approximately two-thirds of the time when working more than six hours in a shift.
Thus, Taco Bell has argued in its opposition to the motion for summary judgment, material facts are still in dispute.
For more information about the case or for questions about meal period and rest break litigation, contact Jessica Diulio at Ford & Diulio PC. Phone (714) 384-5540.