Posted on 12/21/2004 4:02:12 PM PST by NormsRevenge
The Schwarzenegger administration, under fire for attempting a quick rule change that would weaken the state law that guarantees lunch breaks for workers, backed off its plan for the emergency order on Monday.
Instead, state officials say they will pursue changes to the lunch-break law under regular, drawn-out procedures that give the public an opportunity to weigh in at public hearings and during a public comment period.
"We wanted to make sure all the interested parties had a chance to have their concerns heard," said Dean Fryer, spokesman for the state Department of Industrial Relations, the agency overseeing the division that proposed the emergency rule change two weeks ago, prompting sharp criticism from labor groups and Democrats.
Fryer said the department switched course after receiving a high volume of calls from people concerned about the proposed changes to the lunch law.
Labor organizations claimed a victory Monday.
"Governor Schwarzenegger is expected to continue his efforts to take away guaranteed lunch breaks, but at least he has been forced to do it openly, rather than in a sneak attack," said Art Pulaski, executive secretary- treasurer of the California Labor Federation.
The current law states that employers must give workers a minimum 30- minute lunch break before their fifth hour of work. The law allows workers to sue employers and win back wages for as much as four years in cases where employers fail to provide the break.
State officials proposed changing the rule to give workers the break before the sixth hour of work and limiting back pay to one year instead of four.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
/i mur jen see/
by: Carmen Balber
e.mer.gen.cy /i mur jen see/ n. An unexpected and sudden event that must be dealt with urgently.
Arnold really needs to work on his definitions. For the past year he has defined special interests as anybody that criticizes Arnold. Now he can't figure out the meaning of the word "emergency." On Friday, the Gov submitted an "emergency" regulation to change enforcement of California's mandatory meal and break rules. The regulation would severely weaken workers' legal right to a lunch hour. Who benefits when it's harder to enforce labor laws? Big hourly employers, like Arnold-backers Target ($240,000 donor to the Gov), the Gap ($197,400) and Wal-Mart ($210,000).
California law allows a governor to implement regulations on an emergency basis -- with no public hearing or input -- only when "a regulation is necessary for the immediate preservation of public peace, health and safety, or general welfare." What sudden public health threat was so urgent that Arnold was forced to call an immediate halt to lunch hours? Too many workers falling asleep at heavy machinery in after-lunch-lethargy?
Actually, Wal-Mart broke the lunch time rules and is facing a lawsuit. For Arnold, that's an emergency.
Contributors like Wal-Mart would be off the hook if the regulation takes effect. For Arnold, calling the lunch break issue an emergency avoids the unpleasantly public regulatory process where California employees might toss up their lunch if they heard that Arnold wants to toss out lunch breaks on behalf of the special interests. So he throws out the dictionary and calls it an emergency, like he did last month when he tossed out the nurse-to-patient ratios.
Can someone get Arnold that book from Merriam-Webster?
Read more at: http://www.ArnoldWatch.org
The production of Dumb Pills should be regulated. This is unbelievable. Now eating laws?!
OK, who was the wise-guy who called Arnold a conservative?? The price he must pay to sleep with Maria...oh well.
Regardless, he is FAR BETTER FOR CALIFORNIA than the commie leftist Davis. Thank God that criminal is gone. Only $40 BILLION too late...
I've been trying to figger it out. My best friend of 35 years lives in CA. My two middle 23-26 year old kids live in the Bay Area. Probably the only conservatives in a 20 mile radius (though I know nothing about CA - other than most in San Fran seem to be queer). IMOHO based upon ignorance.
I'm glad to see Maria's got him running around in circles, keeping him busy with this sort of nonsense instead of cutting taxes or dealing with illegal immigration.
I don't agree. He is not better for CA than Davis. I am conservative to the core and I would vote for Davis again against Arnold any day. I would prefer a real conservative
Republican but right now would settle for anyone. I knew this would happen if he got in and told everyone I knew but no, they had to vote for the jerk.
He is not better for CA than Davis.
======
Wow, now that is bad. Davis was a criminal, a hard-left lib, tax and spend crazy, self-serving fool that spent his entire governorship raising (extorting) campaign bucks out of his liberal voting base, and knowingly allowed the state to go into a RECORD DEFICIT of well over $30 Billion!!!!
I think it is a bit early to see if Arnie "can beat that record". Saying Davis is better than Arnie is insane -- at least Arnie is FIGHTING THE LIBERALS THAT STILL RUN THE LEGISLATURE IN CALIFORNIA --- give me a break. Arnie took on a pot full of excrement when he took over his job -- runaway debt, runaway welfare, runaway illegal immigration, runaway everything --- a total liberal crap hole.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.