When the Legislature codified the meal break requirements from the Industrial Welfare Commission (IWC) orders in Labor Code Section 512(a), it did not limit the kinds of employees to whom those requirements applied.
According to the enforcement agency, the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement, it appears that exempt employees are entitled to a meal period pursuant to Labor Code Section 512(a), but the one-hour premium pay requirement for a missed meal period does not apply.
Historically, the mandate for a meal period was found only in the IWC wage orders. If an employee was properly classified as exempt in Section 1 of the appropriate order, the meal period was not required.
However, Labor Code Section 512(a), enacted in 1999, now includes a meal period provision that does not limit coverage to any class of employee.
Note that other subdivisions of the section do contain meal period coverage limits associated with collective bargaining agreements.
The premium pay provision for failure to provide the meal period was added to the meal break section of the IWC orders and to the Labor Code in Section 226.7.
Both the provision in the IWC order and the Labor Code apply only if the meal period is required by an applicable IWC order. Since the orders exclude exempt employees from coverage, no liability for premium pay is required.
The wage orders also exclude exempt employees from the rest break requirement, but there is no language in the Labor Code entitling employees to a rest break (except the lactation accommodation) that is separate from the IWC order regulations. Consequently, a conflict does not exist between the two regulations and the premium for a missed rest break also does not apply.
Again, Labor Code Section 226.7 applies only when a rest break or meal period is required by an applicable wage order.