In a significant decision that rebukes a major 2014 ruling by a federal court, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration has said that carriers do not have to comply with California laws requiring employers to provide workers with regular meal breaks and paid rest breaks.
The agency announced Friday, Dec. 21, that it will grant a petition filed in September by the American Trucking Associations asking that the agency exempt carriers from the California-specific break laws, arguing they interfere with federal hours of service regulations. FMCSA said Friday it agrees, stating that the 1996 Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Administration Act (F4A) dictates that federal law supersedes state laws on regulating drivers’ work schedules.
ATA had attempted to override the 2014 court decision, coming from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in the case of Dilts v. Penske, in Congress for years. Via the so-called “Denham Amendment” (named for Rep. Jeff Denham of California, who lost his seat in the last election), ATA pressed Congress to intervene and re-establish the federal government’s authority in regulating drivers’ schedules. Those years-long efforts were unsuccessful, and, in September, ATA turned its attention to the U.S. DOT on the matter.
Allied with ATA on seeking to overturn the decision was the Western States Trucking Association, who argued that the ruling created a wave of litigation against trucking companies, and not only large fleets but also small carriers. Litigants and their attorneys sued seeking payouts to drivers for not allowing them to take, or compensating them for, the California-required meal and rest breaks.
California labor laws require that employers provide a 30-minute meal break every five hours at work and a paid 15-minute rest break for every four hours of work time.
“Safety is FMCSA’s top priority and having uniform rules is a key component to increasing safety for our truck drivers,” said FMCSA Administrator Ray Martinez. “During the public comment period, FMCSA heard directly from drivers, small business owners, and industry stakeholders that California’s meal and rest rules not only pose a safety risk, but also lead to a loss in productivity and ultimately hurt American consumers.”
Though the decision only applies to the meal and rest break laws, it could impact other trucking cases ongoing in California. Specifically, the DOT’s move could play a role in a decision in the WSTA’s case against another ruling, Dynamex v. Superior Court, that set new criteria for how to determine a driver’s status as an independent contractor or an employee. WSTA argues the Dynamex decision, made by the California Supreme Court in April, could hamper the use of owner-operator truckers in the state and has filed a lawsuit seeking to overturn the decision.
