Grantsville council tables proposed change to employee lunch-and-break policy after employee objections

The Grantsville City Council on April 23 tabled consideration of ordinance 2025-19, a proposed amendment to the city’s break and lunch period policy after multiple written comments from city employees raised concerns about notice and equity.

The ordinance would have prohibited employees from combining two paid 15-minute rest periods with an unpaid 30-minute lunch to form a single one-hour break. Proponents on the council said the change was intended to create a single, citywide standard and to address perceived unfairness between departments, particularly between office staff and field employees such as public works.

“The issue I have heard is that City Hall gets to do whatever City Hall wants to do,” a council presenter said, arguing the change would make treatment “fair and equal across the board.” The presenter cited practices in Tooele City, Sandy and West Valley as examples of municipalities that do not allow combined breaks.

Employees submitted several written comments that were read into the record. A written comment from Gina Roberts, read by staff member Emily Tripp, said employees were not given adequate notice and asked the council to “table this item and get feedback from city employees, especially our hourly employees.” Another written comment from Marie Anderson, also read aloud, said the change “fosters a sense of distrust between employees and supervisors” and urged maintaining the option to combine breaks for employees who work 10-hour shifts.

Employees and their advocates detailed how current schedules create differing paid-break totals: several written comments said employees working five 8-hour days receive 2.5 hours of paid breaks per week while employees working four 10-hour days receive about 2.0 hours per week, and argued that change would worsen that discrepancy. One commenter wrote that a one-hour lunch is “more beneficial for both productivity and overall well-being” and allows time for medical or short personal appointments without taking additional time off.

City staff and department leads described operational objections and practical concerns. Christy, a department head, said field crews need shorter, unscheduled access to breaks in extreme weather and described routine scheduling practices that ensure coverage, such as rotating lunches among employees so someone remains available to the public. A police official said patrol and 12-hour shift schedules likely need a separate policy. Staff also noted manual timekeeping adjustments are required now when employees combine breaks and lunch in the city’s system, and that accurate clocking affects retirement reporting to URS.

Some council members and staff floated alternatives during the discussion: paying both 15-minute breaks to all nonexempt employees without requiring clock-outs; allowing employees to take an unpaid one-hour lunch with supervisor approval by extending shifts by 30 minutes; or preserving current flexibility for departments while clarifying recordkeeping. Several council members asked staff to survey employees, provide department-level feedback and produce a cost estimate showing the payroll impact of paying additional break time.

Council took no final vote on ordinance 2025-19 and instead directed staff to gather additional information, including broader employee feedback and a cost estimate, and to return the item for further consideration at a later meeting.

The council did not adopt any immediate change to break or lunch rules; employees and supervisors may continue current practices until the council acts on a revised proposal.