New at Reason

Julian Sanchez | April 25, 2005

"Let's do lunch" is practically the California state motto, but the Village Voice's Anya Kamenetz wonders whether making it mandatory isn't going a bit far.

Reason needs your support. Please donate today!

Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.

← Dems' Boob Tube Dilemma | Main | ITC Flirts with Free Trade →

See all 8 comments | Leave a comment

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment or disable your ability to comment for any reason at any time.

|4.25.05 @ 3:59PM|#

I worked in the restaurant industry for years. If you wanted to make money you worked straight through. I'd often start work at 10 AM and remain in constant motion until 1 AM the next day. If I had had to sit down for 30 minutes halfway through the day, there would have been a serious danger that I might not have been able to get back up again.
Despite that, I miss it. In fact, the hectic busy nature of it all and the physical activity are the things that I miss the most. The only drawback was the chafing (yes, I know, too much info).

|4.25.05 @ 4:07PM|#

I didn't think this was terribly relevant to my life until I saw that bit about the Cheesecake Factory. Do NOT fuck with the Cheesecake Factory- that is sacrilege.

The Wine Commonsewer|4.25.05 @ 4:12PM|#

I'm pretty sure that Californicate has had mandatory lunch and break rules for as long as I can remember. The rules were changed a few years ago and they are changed from time to time.

And the unions weigh in, odd, given that union contracts give them the power to waive Ca's mandatory lunch provision on behalf of their worker's. Must be the Retail Clerks way of beating up Wal-Mart.

Under current law I believe that the employee has the right to opt out of mandatory lunch provisions if the work day is less than six hours.

|4.25.05 @ 4:53PM|#

I have relatives on my mother's side that live down outside Frisco. During the recent family gossip it was related that one of my cousins there was having some drama at work-- she works for a shipping company (UPS, FedX or something). She's in hot water with the management because, to keep up with the large amount of orders she has to process, she had been WORKING THROUGH HER LUNCHBREAKS without authorization, and fudging it on her timesheets. She's concerned that she's going to get canned for this.

My initial reaction was, WTF? Somebody getting fired because they want to put in free overtime?

But now it makes perfect sense. Management is deathly afraid of getting their butts sued. You WILL take that mandatory break! If you can't play by these rules, maybe you should find employment elsewhere...

|4.25.05 @ 7:28PM|#

I'd often start work at 10 AM and remain in constant motion until 1 AM the next day.

I decided a long time ago -- after too many double shifts after a full day of classes -- that no job is worth working more than 8 hours or so a day. Maybe I'm "lazier" than the average "go-getter" but my personal time is worth more to me than the extra pay I could have gotten (when I was hourly) or the extra ass-kissing I could accomplish (now that I am salaried). So... I am rather sympathetic toward workers who get the shaft from their employer. Let me tell you, standing six or seven hours straight ringing up groceries sucks ass.

WORKING THROUGH HER LUNCHBREAKS without authorization

Why would anybody do this? Unless she is paid per order or something. I simply do not understand when people work extra time for no reward, rather than admit they are overworked.

|4.25.05 @ 8:18PM|#

Rhywun:

I freely admit I am overworked, but the powers that be won't do anything about it (like hire more help).

So, in order to get the job done and not get fired, I neglect my personal life and work way more than anyone should have to.

|4.26.05 @ 10:36AM|#

Rhywun,
I actually enjoyed working at the restaurants I worked at and there was a direct relationship between how hard I worked and how much money I made. SO, the context was right for me to work like a fiend. I enjoyed having that option. I think we all agree that more options, not less, are what is needed.
The odd thing about all this is how these mandatory breaks actually decrease the flexibility some people enjoy in their jobs. I now work hourly as a programmer (an oddity, I know) and I do not have the option to work through lunch and leave 30 minutes early. I understand that there are positions where breaks ought to be mandatory for safety reasons, but it makes absolutely no sense when talking about someone like me.

|4.26.05 @ 12:01PM|#

So, in order to get the job done and not get fired, I neglect my personal life and work way more than anyone should have to.

I would look for another job.

I think we all agree that more options, not less, are what is needed.

True enough. My main gripe nowadays as a salaryman is that so many people feel the need to suck up to their boss and work 9, 10, 11 hour days just to show how wonderful they are. Funny thing is, I look over and they're shopping online and chatting with their friends half the time. Meanwhile, I do all my work within the allotted time, and *I* look bad.