I work at the control counter in a bowling center in California. All of my shifts are at least four hours in length; about 75% of the time they are between 6 and 7 hours long. Often, I am the only employee running the center (besides a bartender and a mechanic, who are not trained on working the front counter), and this causes me to be unable to take breaks.

The law states: "Unless the employee is relieved of all duty during his or her thirty minute meal period, the meal period shall be considered an "on duty" meal period that is counted as hours worked which must be compensated at the employee’s regular rate of pay. An "on duty" meal period shall be permitted only when the nature of the work prevents an employee from being relieved of all duty and when by written agreement between the employer and employee an on-the-job paid meal period is agreed to. The written agreement must state that the employee may, in writing, revoke the agreement at any time." However, this written agreement was never put into place, and yet I am forced to eat while on duty. My manager says that because I worked a significant amount of time (about 4 months) before objecting to this practice, my actions implied an agreement to this effect.

Similarly, I do not get 10-minute rest breaks. My manager has told me that there are slow times during my shifts when I am not required to actually do any work for 10-minute stretches (or longer) and therefore I am not required to receive an additional break. Both of these issues have been occurring since I was hired in August 2003.

Is any or all of this legal?

If your boss made you sit on his lap and touched your private parts and bit your bottom and you didn't object for four months doesn't mean it is now legal. You cannot give up your rights. If you were to faint and hit your head from lack of glucose in your blood from not eating he would be in quite a bit of trouble. Do you have any disease like diabetis or handicap that makes it dangerous for you not to eat? You need to eat or you will become a skeleton holding a pair of bowling shoes. I would get a note from a doctor that says food is something that is important to your well being. If my boss did not let me eat I would be afraid I might get dizzy and break something expensive. :cool:

Thanks for the reply, but it didn't answer my question. I never said that I couldn't eat, I said that I had to eat while on the clock (which is the issue).

Sorry for making light of your problem. Actually new laws are being passed for people just like you.
http://www.rpnlaw.com/lunchbreaks0505.htm
By Nicole Minkow
According to existing law, which in California consists of the California Labor Code and the Wage Orders issued by the Industrial Welfare Commission (IWC), an employer must provide the employee with a lunch or dinner break of at least thirty minutes when the employee works more than five hours. If the employee works no more than six hours for the entire day, the meal period may be waived by a mutual agreement between the employer and the employee. Furthermore, if an employee works for a period of 10 hours, the employee must be provided a second meal period of no less than 30 minutes. This requirement may also be waived by a mutual agreement between the employer and the employee if the total work period per day is no more than 12 hours. During an employee’s meal period, the employee must be relieved of all work.