Last Updated on September 28, 2026 by MyHRConcierge

Employers that provide unpaid meal periods must consider whether employees are actually receiving sufficient time to eat and attend to personal matters without performing work. A recent U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) opinion letter provides additional guidance on how required travel during a meal period can affect whether that time must be compensated under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).

In Opinion Letter FLSA2026-11, issued September 7, 2026, the DOL concluded that several minutes of required travel during a 60-minute meal period did not make the meal period compensable under the circumstances presented. The opinion provides useful guidance for employers evaluating meal periods that require employees to walk or travel to a designated location before they can eat.

FLSA Rules for Meal Periods

The FLSA does not generally require employers to provide meal periods or rest breaks. When employers choose to provide them, however, the manner in which the break is structured can determine whether the time is considered hours worked. State and local laws may impose additional requirements that employers must also consider.

Under the FLSA, a bona fide meal period is generally not compensable when an employee is relieved from work duties and has sufficient time to eat a regular meal. The DOL generally considers a meal period of 30 minutes or more sufficient, although the agency has emphasized that 30 minutes is not an inflexible requirement. A shorter period may qualify as a bona fide meal period when the circumstances provide employees with sufficient time to eat.

The distinction between a meal period and a paid rest break is important. Short rest breaks- generally lasting 20 minutes or less- are typically considered compensable hours worked, while bona fide meal periods generally are not.

The DOL’s Recent Opinion Letter

The issue addressed in FLSA2026-11 involved employees at a detention facility who received a 60-minute unpaid meal period. A security therapy aide at a detention facility contacted the DOL seeking guidance on whether travel during meal periods is compensable under the FLSA, along with a separate issue involving a collective bargaining agreement (CBA).

The employees reportedly spent approximately three to seven minutes traveling each way, meaning the travel could consume between six and 14 minutes of the meal period. The question was whether that required travel meant employees were not receiving a bona fide, unpaid meal period. The DOL concluded that, based on the facts presented, the meal period remained noncompensable.

Why the Travel Time Did Not Make the Meal Period Compensable

The DOL’s analysis focused on two primary considerations: whether employees were relieved from their work duties and whether they retained enough time to use the meal period for its intended purpose.

Employees were not required to perform work while eating and appeared to be relieved of their work responsibilities during the meal period. Even after accounting for the required walking time, employees had approximately 46 to 54 minutes in the designated break area. According to the DOL, that amount of time was more than sufficient for employees to eat a meal and attend to personal matters. The remaining time was also substantially longer than the 30 minutes ordinarily considered sufficient for a bona fide meal period.

Importantly, the DOL stated that the amount of travel time alone does not determine whether the travel or meal period is compensable. Instead, the analysis considers whether the required travel meaningfully reduces the employee’s ability to use the meal period for its intended purpose.

The Amount of Time Remaining Matters

The opinion illustrates why employers should evaluate the entire meal period rather than automatically treating all employer-required travel during a meal break as compensable. 

For example, an employee who receives a 60-minute meal period but spends approximately 10 minutes walking to and from a designated dining area may still have roughly 50 minutes available for eating and personal activities. Under the circumstances addressed in FLSA2026-11, the DOL determined that this remaining time was sufficient. 

That does not mean that employers can deduct any amount of travel time from an employee’s meal period without consequence. The DOL specifically recognized that lengthy travel, frequent interruptions or other restrictions can reduce a meal period to the point that it may become compensable.

When Travel Could Affect Compensability

The DOL’s guidance should not be interpreted as a blanket rule that travel during a meal period is always unpaid. If required travel substantially reduces the amount of time employees have available to eat, the meal period may no longer qualify as a bona fide meal period. Similarly, frequent or lengthy interruptions, work responsibilities or other employer-imposed restrictions may cause some or all of the period to become compensable.

The DOL referenced Naylor v. Securiguard, Inc., in which security guards were required to travel to a specific location during a 30-minute meal period. Employer-required travel could consume up to 12 minutes of the break, leaving employees with as little as 18 minutes to eat. The court determined that the shortened period could raise questions about whether employees received a bona fide meal period and whether the travel itself was compensable. The comparison demonstrates an important compliance consideration: the effect of travel on the employee’s meal period matters more than simply the existence of travel.

The DOL Rejects an Absolute “Complete Relief” Standard

Another notable aspect of FLSA2026-11 is the DOL’s discussion of whether employees must be completely free from every restriction for the entire meal period to remain noncompensable.

The DOL explained that it, along with most federal courts, evaluates meal-period compensability under a “predominant benefit” approach rather than requiring absolute freedom from every limitation or condition. Under this approach, brief travel to a location where employees can eat generally does not make the travel time compensable when the meal period otherwise provides sufficient time for eating and personal activities.

The opinion also acknowledges that some federal courts have applied a different “completely relieved from duty” standard. As a result, employers should consider the law applicable to their jurisdiction and specific workplace circumstances, rather than relying on the federal opinion letter in isolation.

Looking Beyond Federal Requirements

While FLSA2026-11 provides federal guidance, employers should also evaluate applicable state and local requirements. The FLSA does not require meal or rest breaks, but state laws may impose break requirements that provide employees with additional protections.

Employers operating in multiple states should therefore review their meal-period policies across jurisdictions rather than adopting a single federal standard for every location.

Key Takeaway

DOL Opinion Letter FLSA2026-11 clarifies that brief, employer-required travel during a meal period does not automatically make the travel or entire meal period compensable. When employees are relieved from their duties and retain sufficient time to eat and attend to personal matters, the meal period may remain noncompensable under the FLSA.

However, employers should evaluate the total circumstances. Lengthy travel, interruptions, work responsibilities or other restrictions that substantially reduce an employee’s ability to take a bona fide meal period can create wage-and-hour compliance concerns. For employers, the practical takeaway is to look beyond the scheduled length of a meal period and assess how employees actually spend that time.

For more information on how to enhance your organization’s compliance efforts, contact MyHRConcierge at 855-538-6947, sales@myhrconcierge.com. Or, schedule a convenient consultation below: