Saving your lunch break for the end of the day? Here’s what HR has to say

Amid an ongoing burnout, wellbeing and mental health crisis among the working population, a niche yet alarming practice has employers questioning the legality and health ramifications, as well as their own obligations.

One can see the allure of taking an hour-long lunch break at the end of the day, with many believing it is worth pushing through the working day to get a seemingly early mark from work.

HR Leader spoke to HR and employment law experts to examine the practice, the legality, and other considerations.

According to We Are Charlotte’s director of people advisory, Tim Guille, pushing through a workday causes cognitive failure, higher error rates, and burnout, which is the opposite of what employees may be trying to experience.

The practice of taking lunch at the end of the day, he said, “has become common in hybrid setups as workers try to balance heavy workloads with personal life. However, skipping lunch to leave early might actually be a symptom of deeper workload pressures or a lack of formal flexible working options.”

Guille also noted that the trend, while potentially impactful at an individual level, would have a substantial effect should it take off.

“If multiple people log off early, coverage drops, client responsiveness suffers, and late-afternoon collaboration stalls. It also signals a workplace culture where staff feel rushed or eager to escape,” he said.

In this way, he urged employers to offer legitimate and flexible start times, and highlight a proper midday lunch break, and have this practice modelled by leaders both within their own breaks and in review of workloads and time pressures.

While there is no universal rule about lunch breaks, Guille noted that Australian workplace law and many awards, such as the Clerks Award, dictate a break after five hours, changing the question to how and when this can be enforced by employers.

Swaab employment lawyer Michael Byrnes said: “It is crucial that there be strict compliance with the applicable term of the award or enterprise agreement. Any such term will override the personal preference of an employee. Indeed, seeking to accommodate the personal preference of an employee might put the employer at risk of breaching the award.”

Byrnes agreed that saving lunch breaks for the end of the day raises both operational and psychosocial risks, noting that the practice itself would be incredibly disruptive to the workplace.

Beyond missing deadlines and meetings, Byrnes noted that the practice runs counter to the rationale that “after a certain period of work it is important for health, safety and wellbeing for employees to be given a break and have an opportunity to eat, drink and recharge”.

“It is a matter of commonsense and experience that denying employees a proper opportunity to eat is usually a false – productivity and concentration drop appreciabl[y] as the day go[es] on,” he said.

In this way, Byrnes urged employers not to hesitate if they find any employees delaying their lunch break, or to insist it be taken at the usual time.

While accepting that the reasoning for this preference can be explored with any employees, he noted that there is no legal requirement to accede to a request and that it may create further problems and inconsistencies with the law.

In a sentiment similar to Guille, Byrnes said: “If employees are seeking to take a later lunch because they are of the view their workload or workflow creates an impediment to taking lunch at the usual time, then that is an issue that should be explored. It may well be that there is an internal culture of managers scheduling meetings or work demands during the usual lunch break and the employees, in taking the later lunch, are seeking to address the symptom of the problem because they are not empowered to solve the cause.”

“That is where senior management of the employer may need to step in.”

In the same vein, Patrick Will of Liquid Employment Lawyers said that taking lunch in the last hour of a work shift could be seen as an unapproved early departure rather than a genuine break, and could constitute a breach of one or more implied duties.

Noting that work health and safety (WHS) laws require persons conducting a business or undertaking to manage work design, job demands and work-related stress as hazards, break scheduling “that causes or exacerbates fatigue or burnout is a statutory duty issue, not just a policy one”.

Further, Will noted that the Fair Work Commission has consistently upheld that management directions relating to breaks in the middle of the day are both lawful and reasonable, adding that neither the commission nor courts recognise the practice as a legitimate meal break.

In this way, Will urged employers to remind employees of these regulatory frameworks and consider the root of the phenomenon.

“An emerging desire for end-of-day breaks highlights that legacy break structures are friction points, signalling a need for organisations to modernise work design while maintaining legal compliance,” he said.

“This phenomenon likely arises when employees feel overwhelmed by relentless meeting schedules, heavy workloads or tight deadlines. Rather than taking a break in the middle of the day, employees may feel compelled to power through to clear their task list, viewing the lunch hour merely as a luxury or an administrative block to be traded for personal time later.”

“This creates a dilemma for HR leaders.”

He added that “while accommodating employee requests is crucial for retention and morale, permitting informal end-of-day breaks directly conflicts with rigid WHS psychosocial hazard regulations requiring active fatigue management throughout the workday”.

Will urged employers to use formal individual flexibility arrangements and flexible working policies, including adjusting an employee’s core start and finish times, and consider implementing meeting-free periods in the middle of the day to reduce cognitive fatigue.

“Managers should lead by example by taking visible lunch breaks, discouraging working lunches and actively monitoring team wellbeing,” he said.

Want to see more stories from trusted news sources?
Make HR Leader a preferred news source on Google.