YAKIMA, Wash. — A federal judge has dismissed most allegations that a Central Washington dairy underpaid its workers, ruling that claims against the dairy were “largely baseless.”

Mensonides Dairy in Mabton committed “technical violations” and owed 22 workers a total of $24,646 for missed meal breaks, U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Whitman Holt ruled Dec. 20.

The dairy didn’t discourage or cut short meal breaks, but was careless by not making sure employees recorded meals on their timecards, Holt wrote.

Holt tossed out the other claims, including one that sought retroactive pay for walking or riding a company vehicle one-quarter of a mile from the parking lot to the time clock.

“Simply because the dairy permitted its employees to use company vehicles to make the trip does not transform the travel time into ‘hours worked,’” Holt wrote.

California law firm Martinez Aguilasocho & Lynch claimed workers were owed a total of $518,488 for missed meal and rest breaks, and unpaid work time.

Holt said the firm’s calculations were “unclear, difficult to follow, aggregated with nonviable theories, and in many instances not possible to reconcile with the court’s own work.”

Efforts to obtain comment from attorney Charlotte Mikat-Stevens, who argued the case for the workers, were unsuccessful.

The dairy filed to reorganize under Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2018. The law firm filed a claim on behalf of workers employed by the dairy between 2015 and 2018.

Holt heard testimony from 21 workers over nine days, spread out in October 2020 and May 2021.

Holt described some of the testimony as evasive and contradictory. He said one worker’s testimony was “bizarre, confusing and downright nonsensical.”

Nevertheless, the judge went through the time cards, identified missing meal breaks and did the math himself.

The number of missed meals was relatively small, Holt said, and it was common for workers to take two-hour meal breaks for whatever reason.

Because workers self-reported meals, they probably took meal breaks while on the clock, he wrote.

Efforts to obtain comment from the dairy or its lawyer were unsuccessful.

Holt also rejected claims that workers weren’t given rest breaks. The dairy allowed workers to decide when they needed a break, Holt observed.

The workers, and possibly their lawyer, were under the misconception that breaks didn’t count because they weren’t scheduled, according to Holt.

Later, the dairy scheduled breaks and took away the freedom that workers had to choose break times. It was probably done, Holt said, “to avoid future litigation about the matter.”

In a footnote, Holt mused on whether the “more paternalistic system” benefited workers. “This ultimately is a policy issue that is beyond the scope of the court’s inquiry,” he wrote.

Holt tossed out a claim that milkers were not paid for all hours. Milkers went home when the cows were milked. Efficient milkers left early and were paid for a full 8-hour shift.

The judge said the workers’ lawyer argued for a system that would allow workers to leave early, but require employers to pay overtime on days the cows weren’t milked in 8 hours.

”This is a one-way ratchet to which no rational employer would agree,” Holt wrote.

The awards to individual workers were based on the number of missed breaks and ranged from $3,004 to $36.75. Holt awarded a matching $24,646 to attorneys representing the workers.