Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Labor Standards Breaks topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Labor and Industry budget bill would set state rest-break rules, allow temporary court orders in workplace cases

2783774 · March 26, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Senate File 2,373, the Department of Labor and Industry budget bill, would set statutory rest- and meal-break minimums and allow the department to seek temporary court orders in urgent employment-law cases, drawing questions about penalty levels and outreach to small employers.

Senate File 2,373, the Department of Labor and Industry budget bill, appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee on March 26 and included provisions to create explicit state standards for rest and meal breaks and to allow the Department of Labor and Industry (DLI) to ask district courts for temporary restraining orders (TROs) in certain employment-law matters.

Nicole Blissenbach, Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry, told the committee the bill would require employers to provide at least 15 minutes of rest break for every four consecutive hours worked and a 30-minute meal break for every six consecutive hours. "Many employers and employees are surprised to find that the length of a rest break and meal break is not clearly defined in state law," Blissenbach said, adding that the bill includes damages and penalties for violations and that penalties collected would go to the general fund.

The bill also would allow DLI to seek an order from a district court restraining an employer from continuing violations of employment laws under the department—s jurisdiction. Blissenbach said some violations, such as denial of pregnancy-related accommodations, can cause irreparable harm that requires immediate court intervention rather than the longer administrative contested-case process.

Committee members questioned the penalty structure at length. Senator Limmer and others asked how the proposed "up to $1,000" penalty per violation was determined and raised concerns about disproportionate impact on small employers. Blissenbach responded that the penalty is a maximum and that DLI uses statutory factors such as gravity of the offense, business size and number of employees affected in setting penalties.

Senator Curran and Senator Crum expressed concern that the bill could allow agencies to issue maximum penalties on a first offense and asked about protections for small businesses and whether first-time infractions should be treated differently. Commissioner Blissenbach said the department prioritizes education and outreach, with staff who provide employer guidance and webinars, wage and hour bulletins and partnerships with business associations, and that penalties are applied only after consideration of statutory factors.

The committee approved recommending Senate File 2,373 to the Labor Committee and re-referred the bill. The transcript records voice votes and committee discussion but does not include a roll-call tally.