Short answer. Not less than sixty minutes. Article 85 makes it the duty of every employer to give employees not less than sixty minutes time-off for their regular meals, subject to such regulations as the Secretary of Labor may prescribe. Sixty minutes is the floor, not the standard entitlement.
What the law says
it shall be the duty of every employer to give his employees not less than sixty (60) minutes time-off for their regular meals
Labor Code, Article 85 — Meal Periods. Read the full provision →
The obligation and its measure
The Code frames this as something the employer owes rather than something the employee may request: it shall be the duty of every employer to give his employees not less than sixty (60) minutes time-off for their regular meals. The measure is a minimum — not less than — so an hour is the floor and a longer break is perfectly consistent with the provision. The break is tied to regular meals, meaning the ordinary meal falling within the shift, not any pause an employer chooses to designate as one.
Why this is described as time-off
The words time-off are doing deliberate work, and the contrast with the neighbouring provision is the point. Article 84 provides that rest periods of short duration during working hours shall be counted as hours worked. The meal period is not described that way. The Code is distinguishing between a brief pause inside the shift, which remains part of your working time, and a proper meal period, which is time released from duty. That distinction is what determines whether the hour sits inside or outside the day you are paid for.
The regulations the article leaves room for
The duty is expressed as subject to such regulations as the Secretary of Labor may prescribe. The Code therefore anticipates that the detail — including the circumstances in which the arrangement may differ — is worked out in regulations rather than in the article itself. The practical consequence is that a shortened meal period is a question about those regulations and whether the workplace falls within them. It is not something an employer settles on its own view of operational need, and a policy announcing a shorter break is not by itself the answer.
When the break is not really a break
The commonest live issue is not the length but the interruption: staff told to stay at the counter, keep the radio on, answer calls, or remain in a prescribed area during the hour. That matters because it goes to whether the time was genuinely released. If you were required to remain on duty or at a prescribed workplace, the definition of hours worked in Article 84 becomes the relevant provision. Note down what you were actually required to do during meal periods over a representative fortnight — that record is what settles it.