Nazi cbg bans poster for writing you dont get paid for lunch.

Go down

Nazi cbg bans poster for writing you dont get paid for lunch.

Post  JoeC (McGruff) on Thu Mar 18, 2010 5:55 am

McGruff here taking a bit out of lame posts, at lame sites. This link was P.M’d me by a member of this forum,from the lamest of all labor/ employment sites LLT. They seldom get it right and only those that agree with there Nazi moderator cbg can post other wise you are banned like this poor guy 48 Packard. Of course under the circumstance the poster at this site and LameLawtalk wanted McGruffs input here.
McGruffs critique will appear in blue. The link below is the original locked post. Now lets get in to it wolf wolf!!

- - Lunch breaks California http://www.laborlawtalk.com/showthread.php?t=257836

hr newbie2 03-09-2010 01:21 PM Lunch breaks California

If an employee is scheduled to take 30 minutes of lunch break every work day, and that employee constantly shortens her lunch to 5-10 minutes and clocks back in early.....is the employer at risk for any liabilities for not providing 30 minutes of lunches?

Ok the question posed by this poster is one of reporting time, paid as well, as unpaid. Ca law an employer may not employ an employee for a work period of more than five hours per day without providing the employee with a meal period of not less than thirty minutes, except that if the total work period per day of the employee is no more than six hours, the meal period may be waived by mutual consent of both the employer and employee.... Cal Labor Code Section 512 Full text click: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=lab&group=00001-01000&file=500-558

The first question I have is; dude what does your payroll Dept. say? The answer to the posters question is no, as long as you are not violating 512. Just because the employee is clocking back early from lunch does not mean her meal break is ended under Section 512. The posters question has little to almost nothing to do with 512. The employer recognizes and comports to it. No where in the post does the poster make any reference to “working” after clocking in, only that she clocks back in 10 minutes early from her break.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DAW 03-09-2010 01:28 PM

Yes.

http://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/FAQ_MealPeriods.htm

DAW is an accountant not a bad guy, but he is looking at the wrong statute, and reading the one he linked improperly. The statute as you can see by link is addressing the 30 minute meal period the employer must provide, the statute does not address reporting at all.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

hr newbie2 03-09-2010 01:53 PM


Thank you. So just to be clear, even though the employer is scheduling 30 minutes of lunch and the employee clocks in early and returns to [the] work [place] earlier than 30 minutes out of their own accord, the employer is still at risk for violating the california law? if that is the case, how should it be remedied?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CO_Daisy 03-09-2010 02:19 PM
I'm going to tread lightly, as I have found out from reading other posts that California is much, much different with labor laws than Colorado...

I would write up the employee for not following the schedule, especially if this 5-10 minutes per day is causing her to go into OT for the day. The write-up should state that her work schedule is to with the lunch break scheduled

The Nazi cbg banned 48Packard one way to find out is click a user then try to P.M the user if you cant it is a banned user. This post is typical of the mindset of these lames. Disagree the P.M's start and the rat packing begins. Well Nazi you and your lame's are bully's you don't have the guts to come over to this site and dispute it because it is all true. These posters are cowards they have to be on lame sites other wise their short comings appear quickly.


Last edited by JoeC (McGruff) on Thu Apr 15, 2010 3:09 am; edited 13 times in total
avatar
JoeC (McGruff)
Admin

Posts : 705
Join date : 2008-08-31
Age : 57
Location : Seattle Wa

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Nazi cbg bans poster for writing you dont get paid for lunch.

Post  XRAYVISION on Fri Mar 19, 2010 4:51 am

Thank you for bringing this here to read. Just incredible how truly pathetic they are. Can you imagine if they really did have jobs over there and some one actually had to work for them, or something hysterical like they really do have a day job and who ever they have to answer to finds they are playing on the computer all day! Razz

XRAYVISION

Posts : 11
Join date : 2009-12-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Nazi cbg bans poster for writing you dont get paid for lunch.

Post  JoeC (McGruff) on Sun Mar 21, 2010 12:13 am

You know you may be on to something. Fatty three heart attacks Patty and the Nazi cbg get caned often for being on the internet posting when they are paid to do something else. The Nazi cbg actually one time wrote it is job requirement in H.R to “work the boards” (even though she is not in H.R).

It’s no surprise they can not distinguish “hours worked” from what the average employee does on break, because they are always goofing off on the internet playing “make believe manger”, their real world mangers have to give them the boot for being poor performers on the job.

I have had to defend employees that used idle time and “work the boards” before. Managers do not like their subordinates straying far from the company’s web site on the computer. I would not even try to use that one as a valid defense at a disciplinary hearing.

All of us that work realize a secretary kicking off her Louie Vuitton’s, and doing a crossword puzzle had better be on break and that does not count as hours worked. Fatty three heart attacks Patty and the Nazi cbg see their role in the cyber world “working the boards” it is no different than the work they should be doing, which they are in fact being paid to do. So to them returning from a break 10 minutes early logging on too LLT is work, because that’s all they do at work until their supervisors catch wind of it and send them down the road.
JoeC (McGruff)
avatar
JoeC (McGruff)
Admin

Posts : 705
Join date : 2008-08-31
Age : 57
Location : Seattle Wa

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Nazi cbg bans poster for writing you dont get paid for lunch.

Post  JoeC (McGruff) on Thu Apr 15, 2010 2:57 am

Will the Nazi cbg ban herself? She should, along with back stabing Betty, NotSmart and some other regular posters. The Nazi cbg agreed with opinion of 48Packard who she branded as trouble maker for telling a poster "you dont get paid for luch", and in true Nazi style banned him. In fact the Nazi cbg called out our own Squills and locked the post threatning him.

Check it out:
http://www.laborlawtalk.com/showthread.php?t=265673
The Nazi quotes the posters she banned word for word! If you did not work during that hour lunch then no, you are not entitled to be paid for the time. W.T.F!!!!
JoeC (McGruff)
avatar
JoeC (McGruff)
Admin

Posts : 705
Join date : 2008-08-31
Age : 57
Location : Seattle Wa

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Nazi cbg bans poster for writing you dont get paid for lunch.

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum