Search form

October 29, 2012
Washington Supreme Court holds that missed breaks trigger overtime pay
Practice Areas: 

In a recent decision, the Washington Supreme Court set forth rules for compensating employees who miss the 10-minute breaks required by Washington regulation. 

In Washington State Nurses Association v. Sacred Heart Medical Center, when employees missed their 10-minute breaks, the employer paid employees for the 8-hour work day and for each missed 10-minute break.  The employer paid the extra time at a straight rate of pay.  The employees sued, arguing that they were entitled to overtime pay for the missed 10-minute breaks.  The employer argued that the Minimum Wage Act requires overtime only for those hours the employee spends on the premises and, because the employees went home after their 8-hour shift, it had to pay only straight time for the breaks. 

The Court held that the period for missed breaks must be added on to the end of a workday and count as “hours worked” within the meaning of the Minimum Wage Act regardless of whether the employees stayed at work beyond the 8 hours of his or her shift.  By permitting employees to miss their break, the Court reasoned, the employer effectively required the employees to be on duty equivalent to an overtime shift at the end of their normal workday.  Thus, the employees were entitled to overtime for each 10-minute missed break.

Accordingly, employers need to keep a record of all 10-minute breaks missed by employees, and pay an additional 10-minutes worth of compensation for each break missed.  If the additional missed break time would cause the employee to work more than 40 hours each week, employers must pay overtime for all time that exceeds 40 hours in a work week.  Alternatively, employers can send employees home early before the time they work, including the missed break time, exceeds 40 hours.  Employers must still pay employees for the missed breaks, but under this alternative system, they may be able to avoid paying overtime if the employee’s total hours remain under 40 hours in a work week.


This advisory is a publication of Eisenhower Carlson PLLC. Our purpose in publishing this advisory is to inform our clients and friends of recent legal developments. It is not intended, nor should it be used, as a substitute for specific legal advice as legal counsel may only be given in response to inquiries regarding particular situations.

Eisenhower Carlson PLLC © 2011  ||  Credits & Disclaimers

This website is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice.

No portion of this page or any content herein may be redistributed or republished without written permission from Eisenhower Carlson PLLC.The information you'll find here is our way of introducing you to Eisenhower Carlson PLLC. It contains no official legal opinions. No responsibility is assumed for the accuracy or timeliness of any information on this website. The information on this website is not intended as a substitute for legal counsel, and is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, a lawyer-client relationship.

We invite you to contact us by phone, fax or e-mail for a session with one of our lawyers.

For your own protection, we strongly suggest that you do not transmit confidential documents to us or anyone else via unsecured email.

If you have any questions or comments concerning this site, please send an email to Do not send confidential information via email.

Concept & Design: CAVLRY
Photography: CAVLRY
Drupal CMS Development: Praece Strategic Technolog Consulting