In the latest chapter in a decade-long saga to determine if interstate drivers are subject to California’s meal and rest break rules, the Ninth Circuit affirmed that drivers of passenger-carrying commercial motor vehicles are not subject to the state’s break regulations. In People of the State of California ex rel. Xavier Becerra v. Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, the court affirmed a decision of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration’s (FMCSA) holding that California meal and rest break rules are preempted.
In practical terms, the court confirmed that California’s meal and rest period requirements, as found in Wage Order 9-2001, do not apply where FMCSA has found them displaced by federal safety regulations. The opinion relies heavily on the Ninth Circuit’s ruling in International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Local 2785 v. Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, which upheld similar preemption for property-carrying commercial motor vehicles.
California argued that FMCSA lacked authority in the passenger-carrier context because the applicable federal regulations do not impose the same mid-shift break rule found elsewhere in the federal scheme. The court rejected that argument, reasoning that the federal rules still regulate duty limits and off-duty periods in the same safety area. The court also held that FMCSA reasonably found California’s rules imposed an “unreasonable burden on interstate commerce,” citing the administrative record regarding scheduling disruptions, reduced operational flexibility, increased driver costs, and the difficulty of complying with varying state break requirements.
For California employers in the transportation industry, the decision is an important confirmation that California’s unique wage and hour laws may not apply to all drivers. As the Ninth Circuit’s opinion was limited to the facts before it, employers should scrutinize whether their drivers and vehicles are subject to the federal Motor Carrier Safety Act and the Hours of Service regulations before assuming state law does not apply.
Jackson Lewis monitors judicial and administrative decisions affecting employers in California. If you have any questions about this decision or related issues, please contact a Jackson Lewis attorney for assistance.
