California Court Upholds Enforceability of Prospective Meal Break Waivers
The California Court of Appeal recently delivered a significant victory for employers in the ongoing California wage and hour compliance battle. In Bradsbery v. Vicar Operating, Inc., the court confirmed on April 21, 2025, that prospective meal period waivers signed by non-exempt employees are enforceable — provided certain conditions are met. While many employers utilized prospective meal waivers for years, this decision provides much-needed clarity and a strategic path forward for employers seeking to reduce potential exposure tied to alleged missed meal periods.
Below is a breakdown of the case and several proactive steps your business can take to take full advantage of this favorable ruling.
Case Summary: Bradsbery v. Vicar Operating, Inc.
Two former employees of Vicar Operating, Inc., a veterinary hospital group, brought a class action lawsuit claiming they were denied meal periods during five- to six-hour shifts. Under California law, a 30-minute, duty-free meal period is required for shifts exceeding five hours. Failure to do so can result in significant liability, including one hour of premium pay per missed meal period.
In its defense, Vicar produced written waivers signed by employees, which read:
“I hereby voluntarily waive my right to a meal break when my shift is 6 hours or less. I understand that I am entitled to take an unpaid 30-minute meal break within my first five hours of work; however, I am voluntarily waiving that meal break. I understand that I can revoke this waiver at any time by giving written revocation to my manager.”
The plaintiffs challenged the validity of the waivers, arguing they were unenforceable because they were not executed on a per-shift basis. This raised the question: Can a meal waiver signed once—typically during onboarding—satisfy legal standards? Until now, there was uncertainty as to whether these one-time waivers (typically signed at the outset of employment to be applied prospectively) would be legally sufficient.
The Court’s Ruling: Prospective Waivers Are Valid – With Conditions
Both the trial court and Court of Appeal rejected the plaintiffs’ arguments. The appellate court affirmed that prospective, revocable meal period waivers are enforceable so long as they are: (1) voluntary, (2) revocable at any time, and (3) notunconscionable, coercive, or obtained through deception.
This ruling is a critical positive development for California employers because it supports a streamlined and lawful approach to handling shifts of less six hours (shifts where employees oftentimes prefer not to take a meal break so as to conclude their shift earlier), and helping reduce unnecessary litigation exposure.
Best Practices: Strengthen Meal Period Waiver Compliance
In light of the Bradsbery decision, now is the time to revisit your meal period waiver practices. Consider taking the following practical compliance steps:
Use a Standalone Written Waiver Form
Avoid ambiguity. Oral waivers or waivers buried in employee handbooks may not stand up to legal scrutiny. The court’s decision supports the use of clearly worded, written waivers signed at the beginning of employment. Review your waiver forms to ensure they comply with the Labor Code and the guidance in Bradsbery.
Clearly Communicate the Waiver Terms
Employees must understand what they are signing. The waiver should clearly state:
That signing is voluntary;That it applies only to shifts of six hours or fewer (or 10–12 hours for second meal periods, if applicable);That it can be revoked at any time in writing (and clearly explain the process for how the waiver can be revoked);Assure employees that there will be no retaliation for declining to sign or revoking the waiver.
Transparency and clarity help guard against claims of coercion or confusion. The more transparent the better.
Address First and Second Meal Periods Separately
The court addressed only first meal period waivers, but the Court’s logic will likely apply to second meal period waivers. Under California law, employees may waive a second meal break on shifts over 10 but less than 12 hours if they took a compliant first meal break. Consider incorporating both types of waivers into your onboarding documentation. Based on our extensive experience litigating these issues (in individual, class, collective, and representative actions), BRGS recommends that you use separate documents for these waivers to avoid any ambiguity and potential arguments that an employee wanted to revoke one of their waivers, but not both waivers, and did not know if they could revoke just one given that the waivers were addressed on the same document. At minimum, we recommend separate signature blocks. Remember, the court reinforced that for a prospective waiver to be enforceable, revocation of the prospective must be available to the employee.
Train Employees and Managers
Employees must be free to choose to revoke their waiver(s) without fear of punishment. Make sure managers and supervisors understand that revoking a waiver — even if administratively inconvenient — is a protected right under California law. A single instance of retaliation can result in significant exposure, particularly if that instance is successfully argued to impact the ability of a class or group of employees to revoke their waivers. Also make sure that it is clearly explained to employees how they can revoke their waiver(s), and who to contact if they have questions about their waivers.
Final Takeaway
The Bradsbery decision affirms that California employers may reduce risk and simplify operations by lawfully implementing prospective, written, and revocable meal period waivers. This ruling offers a practical and compliant framework for managing short-shift meal period obligations under the Labor Code and applicable Wage Orders.
That said, the Court of Appeal emphasized that such waivers must not be unconscionable or used to discourage employees from taking their entitled meal periods. Employers should therefore exercise caution to ensure that waivers are voluntary, clearly communicated, and revocable at any time without retaliation. Proper implementation remains critical to minimizing risk and maintaining legal compliance.
If you have questions relating to this topic or would like to talk about how Produce Trust can help your company, contact Richard Arias at richard.arias@apdbla.com.
The content for this article was provided by Ballard Rosenberg Golper & Savitt, LLP. https://brgslaw.com