This month the California Supreme Court announced its long-awaited decision in Brinker Restaurant Corporation v. Superior Court, holding that employers must provide their nonexempt employees uninterrupted 30-minute meal periods, but need not additionally ensure that the employees take them. But in addition to finally deciding the headline “provide v. ensure” issue that has exposed employers to countless class action lawsuits over the last decade, the Court decided a number of other important meal and rest period compliance and timing issues. And on the all-important question of whether meal and rest break claims can be litigated classwide, the Court addressed several critically important issues that will guide future trial courts in deciding whether or not to certify wage and hour lawsuits as class actions. Here are the key takeaway points from Brinker and what they mean for California employers.