Back in 2018, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration determined that California’s meal and rest break rules for property-carrying truck drivers were incompatible with federal regulations.
In 2020, FMCSA made the same decision for passenger-carrying drivers, saying that California’s break rules were preempted by federal law.
California has worked for years to reverse those decisions, saying that the state’s break rules were beyond the scope of FMCSA’s preemption authority.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit sided with FMCSA in 2021 over California’s petition to overturn the agency’s decision regarding truck drivers.
And just last week, the Ninth Circuit denied California’s petition for review of FMCSA’s determination that the state’s break rules are also preempted for bus drivers.
“The record supports the FMCSA’s conclusion that California’s (meal and rest break) rules impose a significant operational burden upon operators of passenger-carrying commercial motor vehicles,” the Ninth Circuit wrote in its opinion. “This conclusion was sufficient to justify the agency’s decision to preempt California’s (break) rules.”
What is California’s rest break rule?
California’s meal and rest break laws generally require employers to provide employees with an off-duty 30-minute break for every five hours worked and a 10-minute off-duty break for every four-hour period.
As part of California’s wage order, an employer who fails to provide a meal or rest break must pay the employee for one additional hour at the employee’s regular rate of compensation.
The state rule led to numerous class action lawsuits against motor carriers.
FMCSA’s decisions
In 2018, the American Trucking Associations and the Specialized Carriers and Rigging Association petitioned FMCSA to preempt California’s rest break rule.
ATA’s petition stated that the California laws weren’t practical for the transportation industry and undermined safety.
“By arbitrarily forcing trucks off the road more frequently, state rules like California’s also contribute to a critical shortage of truck parking, with serious safety implications,” ATA wrote.
On Dec. 21, 2018, FMCSA announced it was granting the petition for preemption to property-carrying truck drivers subject to federal hours-of-service regulations.
“Safety is FMCSA’s top priority and having uniform rules is a key component to increasing safety for our truck drivers,” then-FMCSA Administrator Ray Martinez said in a news release. “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.”
In January 2020, FMCSA granted a similar petition from the American Bus Association.
“The FMCSA has determined that California’s (meal and rest break) rules … are more stringent than the agency’s hours-of-service regulations, … have no safety benefits that extend beyond those already provided by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations, … are incompatible with the federal hours of service regulations, and that they cause an unreasonable burden on interstate commerce,” the agency wrote.
Ninth Circuit rulings
Twice, the Ninth Circuit has affirmed FMCSA’s authority for preemption.
“The state and federal regulations … share the same purpose of mandating off-duty periods as a form of ensuring commercial motor vehicle safety through fatigue management,” the court wrote in its recent opinion. “That California has chosen a more stringent method of achieving this end does not mean that its rules are outside of the FMCSA’s domain.” LL
Credit: Source link
