Nev. Rev. Stat. » NRS: CHAPTER 608 - COMPENSATION, WAGES AND HOURS

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 608.019

Periods for meals and rest

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 608.019  Periods for meals and rest.

      1.  An employer shall not employ an employee for a continuous period of 8 hours without permitting the employee to have a meal period of at least one-half hour. No period of less than 30 minutes interrupts a continuous period of work for the purposes of this subsection.

      2.  Every employer shall authorize and permit all his or her employees to take rest periods, which, insofar as practicable, shall be in the middle of each work period. The duration of the rest periods shall be based on the total hours worked daily at the rate of 10 minutes for each 4 hours or major fraction thereof. Rest periods need not be authorized however for employees whose total daily work time is less than 3 and one-half hours. Authorized rest periods shall be counted as hours worked, for which there shall be no deduction from wages.

      3.  This section does not apply to:

      (a) Situations where only one person is employed at a particular place of employment.

      (b) Employees included within the provisions of a collective bargaining agreement.

      4.  An employer may apply to the Labor Commissioner for an exemption from providing to all or to one or more defined categories of his or her employees one or more of the benefits conferred by this section. The Labor Commissioner may grant the exemption if the Labor Commissioner believes the employer has shown sufficient evidence that business necessity precludes providing such benefits. Any exemption so granted shall apply to members of either sex.

      5.  The Labor Commissioner may by regulation exempt a defined category of employers from providing to all or to one or more defined categories of their employees one or more of the benefits conferred by this section, upon the Labor Commissioner’s own motion or upon the application of an association of employers. Each such application shall be considered at a hearing and may be granted if the Labor Commissioner finds that business necessity precludes providing that particular benefit or benefits to the employees affected. Any exemption so granted shall apply to members of either sex.

      (Added to NRS by 1975, 1583; A 1977, 82)

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases (8 in the last 5 years), 2013–2025 · leading case: Busk v. Integrity Staffing Solutions, Inc. (In Re Amazon.com, Inc.)
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Busk v. Integrity Staffing Solutions, Inc. (In Re Amazon.com, Inc.) (2018) ca6 · cites it 2× “" Nev. Rev. Stat § 608.019. The law further provides that "no period of less than 30 minutes interrupts a continuous period for work for the purposes of this subsection.”
Risinger v. SOC LLC (2013) nvd · cites it 2× “See NRS §§ 608.019 (governing periods for meals and rest);- 608.”
Jesse Busk v. Integrity Staffing Solutions (2013) ca9 “Nev.Rev.Stat. § 608.019. The law provides, “No period of less than 30 minutes interrupts a continuous period of work for the purposes of this subsection.”
Hukman v. Terrible Herbst Inc. (2022) nvd · cites it 9× “Nev. Rev. Stat. § 608.019 (1), (2). There is no private 18 right of action to enforce NRS § 608.”
Xing v. USA Good Travel and Tour Inc. (2024) nvd · cites it 5× “However, NRS § 608.019 does not include an implied private right of action.”
Yousif v. The Venetian Casino Resort, LLC (2021) nvd · cites it 2× “Nevada law requires that employers pay employees for rest periods according to B the following schedule: 2 14 Unless an employee is exempt pursuant to NRS 608.019, an 15 employee that works at least 3 1/2 continuous hours is permitted: 16 (a) One 10-minute rest period if the…”
Wieben v. Nevada Gold Mines LLC (2025) nvd · cites it 2× “19 /// 20 21 7NGM also argues that any claims regarding “meal and rest” breaks fail because 22 the FLSA does not require employers to compensate meal and rest time, and because there is no private right of action under NRS § 608.019. (ECF No. 26 at 14-15.) In their 23…”
Ataviaous Williams, on behalf of herself and all other similarly situated v. The Hertz Corporation (2025) nvd · cites it 2× “Specifically, the MSJ contends that each of Plaintiff’s claims is premised 18 upon alleged violations of Nevada’s meal break law (NRS 608.019), but the meal break law does 19 not apply to Plaintiff because her employment with Hertz was subject to and covered by a 20 collective…”
Horowitz v. Skywest Airlines, Inc. (2023) cand “2020), the 14 Ninth Circuit held a Nevada statute setting forth MRB requirements similar to those at 15 issue here, see Nev. Rev. Stat. § 608.019 (1)-(2),4 is preempted by the FAA, noting 16 “[f]ederal regulations applicable to [an airline’s] operations provide detailed…”
Castillo v. Western Range Association (2022) nvd “Pursuant to NRS 608.019, an employer must provide an 14 employee with a 30-minute uninterrupted meal period for every continuous 8-hour period of work.”
Church v. Burns (2025) nvd “17 As the court explained in the prior report and recommendation, there is no private right of 18 action to enforce NRS 608.019 related to meal and rest breaks, but Plaintiff may allege he can 19 recover unpaid wages related to meal and rest breaks under his claim for unpaid…”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 608.019(1) — 1 case
Xing v. USA Good Travel and Tour Inc. (2024) nvd “However, NRS § 608.019 does not include an implied private right of action.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 608.019(2) — 1 case
Yousif v. The Venetian Casino Resort, LLC (2021) nvd “Nevada law requires that employers pay employees for rest periods according to B the following schedule: 2 14 Unless an employee is exempt pursuant to NRS 608.019, an 15 employee that works at least 3 1/2 continuous hours is permitted: 16 (a) One 10-minute rest period if the…”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 608.019(3)(b) — 1 case
Ataviaous Williams, on behalf of herself and all other similarly situated v. The Hertz Corporation (2025) nvd “Specifically, the MSJ contends that each of Plaintiff’s claims is premised 18 upon alleged violations of Nevada’s meal break law (NRS 608.019), but the meal break law does 19 not apply to Plaintiff because her employment with Hertz was subject to and covered by a 20 collective…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.