Skip to main content

New Laws for 2015: Wage Statement Violations (CA)


Recently, California Governor Jerry Brown signed into law AB 1506 which provides California employers with a bit of leeway to fix any wage statement violations before a suit can be brought under California's Private Attorneys General Pact ("PAGA").  Under California law, specific information must be included on an employee's pay stub, such as the name and address of the employer, inclusive dates of the pay period, etc.  If an employer violates this part of the Labor Code in regard to the wage statement, an employee can bring suit under the PAGA.  

Under this new law, an employer is now given a limited right to cure certain wage statement violations.  Note, this right to cure is limited to alleged violations of Labor Code section 226(a)(6) and (8).  The law now gives employers 33 days from the postmark date of the notice of a violation to issue a fully compliant pay stub to all aggrieved employees for each pay period for the 3 year period preceding the postmark date of the notice.  Once the employer has cured the violation, written notice (via certified mail) must be given to the complaining employee and the California Labor and Workforce Development Agency that the violation has been cured.  

Assuming the violation has actually been cured, the employee cannot file a claim for penalties against the employer.  However, employers take note:  this right to cure can only be used within any 12 month period for the same violation(s) alleged in the notice, regardless of the location of the worksite!  Even though this is somewhat of a "free pass" that employers are now afforded, it is not a "get out of jail free" card that can be routinely used time and time again.


For additional information:  http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2015/10/05/new-law-will-give-employers-a-small-break-on-pay.html

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NLRB: Discussion Among Employees About Tip Pooling is Protected Concerted Activity

  This Advice Memorandum from the National Labor Relations Board’s Associate General Counsel, Jayme Sophir, addressed whether employees which discussed and complained about tip pooling at work constituted protected concerted activity. In relevant part, an employer in New York operated a chain of steakhouses.  While tip pooling was in place at these steakhouses, some of the employees objected to it on the grounds that it was not transparent and improperly divided tips among the workers.  Employees were told not to complain or talk to each other about the tip pool and were told that doing so would endanger their jobs.  Despite the employer later attempting to provide some clarity as to how the tips were being divided, rancor still existed among some employees.  At one point, the employees were told by a general manager that some employees that had been talking about the tip pool were “cleared out” and the employer would continue to do so. In the Advice Memorandum, it was noted that emplo
Post a Comment
Read more

What I’ve Been Reading This Week

A few years ago, I remember when the “Fight for $15” movement was taking off around the country.  Lo and behold, it appears that a $15/hour minimum wage is not the stopping point, which should be no surprise.  As the below article notes, New York is aggressively moving to ramp up hourly wage rates even higher.  While all the  below articles are worth a read, I called particular attention to that one. As always, below are a couple article that caught my eye this week. Disney World Workers Reject Latest Contract Offer Late last week, it was announced that workers at Disney World had rejected the most recent contract offer from the company, calling on their employer to do better.  As Brooks Barnes at The New York Times writes, the unions that represent about 32,000 workers at Disney World reported their members resoundingly rejected the 5 year contract offer which would have seen workers receive a 10% raise and retroactive increased back pay.  While Disney’s offer would have increased pa
Post a Comment
Read more

Utah Non-Compete Bill Falters in House

Last month, a non-compete bill sponsored by Representative Brian Greene (Republican from Pleasant Grove) & up for vote in the Utah House failed to make it through the Legislature.  The bill sought to ban enforcement of non-competes if they came after a worker was already employed, given no compensation (such as a bonus or promotion) for signing the non-compete, and laid off within six months.  However, by a 22 - 49 vote, the bill was resoundingly defeated after some business groups lobbied to kill the non-compete bill.  One group in particular, The Free Enterprise Utah coalition, argued that the Utah State Legislature should hold off on any changes to non compete laws in the state until a survey about non competes was done among Utah businesses.  Representative Greene had countered this claim and argued that a survey was not needed to show that the current non compete laws in the states allowed many businesses, including some small high tech companies in the state, to per
Post a Comment
Read more