Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

Will PAGA Be Reformed?

By Peter Walrod & Elizabeth N. Hall on June 20, 2024
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

The California Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) is set to undergo a significant overhaul, the first since its enactment nearly two decades ago.  On June 18, 2024, Governor Gavin Newsom announced that an agreement was reached between business and labor groups to reform PAGA.  The agreement comes on the heels of the looming June 27, 2024 deadline to remove a PAGA proposition from the November 5, 2024 ballot.  The agreement, if passed by California’s state legislature, would overhaul several aspects of PAGA and withdraw a ballot measure that would have repealed PAGA’s statutory scheme altogether.  

Currently, PAGA permits employees to bring representative actions against employers on behalf of the State of California as “private attorneys general” for alleged Labor Code violations.  These Labor Code violations include such things as the failure to pay overtime, the failure to provide meal and rest breaks and the failure to comply with California’s stringent wage statement requirements, to name just a few.  Once an employee has initiated a PAGA case for one type of violation, the employee may represent a wider group of “aggrieved employees” for Labor Code violations that the representative employee did not suffer. 

In the wake of California courts’ continued expansion of PAGA lawsuits and criticism of a scheme that seems to enrich lawyers, provide little recovery to employees, and penalize employers for technical violations, business groups have worked to replace the current statute with the California Fair Pay and Employer Accountability Act (the “FPEAA”).  On June 9, 2022, the California Secretary of State announced that the campaign had submitted over 638,000 signatures, and on July 22, 2022, the PAGA repeal initiative had qualified for the November 2024 ballot. 

Unlike the FPEAA, the agreed-upon PAGA reform does not strip PAGA of attorneys’ fees, and does not award 100% of PAGA penalties to employees.  It does, however, increase the employees’ share of PAGA penalties from 25% to 35%, and it promises to expand an employer’s right to cure certain provisions of PAGA and limit potential penalties.  The proposal also would bring another welcome change for employers regarding an employee’s standing to bring a PAGA claim.  If passed, employees could bring claims only for alleged Labor Code violations that they personally experienced.  And unlike FPEAA, the proposed agreement permits employees to avoid mandatory arbitration and allows courts to order injunctive relief.

According to the California Chamber of Commerce, the Labor and Workforce Development Agency (LWDA), the agency which deputizes employees to sue under PAGA on behalf of the state, received over 4,000 PAGA notices in 2014, and at least 4,000 every year since.  Data from the California Department of Industrial Relations indicates that the number of notices sent to the LWDA reached a record high of 7,780 in 2023.  And while attorneys’ fee awards average around $372,000, payments to workers average around $1,300 from PAGA cases filed in court. 

The newly announced PAGA reform would withdraw FPEAA from the November ballot for a less dramatic overhaul of PAGA.  While the agreement must pass through the California legislative process to become law, statements by Senate President Pro-Tempore Mike McGuire (D-North Coast) and Speaker of the Assembly Robert Rivas (D-Salinas) seemingly indicate that a bill will be passed before the June 27, 2024 deadline. 

While any attempt to improve PAGA is welcome, it is not clear that the proposed changes will fully address the concerns that prompted the FPEAA or reduce the number of PAGA lawsuits.  Only as the agreement winds its way through the legislative process will it become clear whether the proposed PAGA reforms might actually help employers mitigate the expense of PAGA litigation, or if the promise of robust right to cure provisions and stricter standing requirements will turn out to be empty.

In the interim, employers with California employees should continue to consult with their legal counsel and representatives regarding complying with PAGA. 

Photo of Peter Walrod Peter Walrod

Peter Walrod is an Associate in Vedder Price’s San Francisco office and a member of the firm’s Litigation and Labor & Employment groups.

Mr. Walrod’s experience includes serving as a judicial extern at the U.S. Department of Labor, Office of Administrative Law Judges…

Peter Walrod is an Associate in Vedder Price’s San Francisco office and a member of the firm’s Litigation and Labor & Employment groups.

Mr. Walrod’s experience includes serving as a judicial extern at the U.S. Department of Labor, Office of Administrative Law Judges and as an intern at the U.S. Department of Labor, Wage and Hour Division.

Read more about Peter WalrodEmail
Show more Show less
Photo of Elizabeth N. Hall Elizabeth N. Hall

Elizabeth N. Hall is a Shareholder in the firm’s Labor and Employment practice area and serves as the Chicago office chair of the firm’s women’s affinity group, “Women at Vedder Empowering Success” (WAVES).

Ms. Hall represents a wide range of employers before state

…

Elizabeth N. Hall is a Shareholder in the firm’s Labor and Employment practice area and serves as the Chicago office chair of the firm’s women’s affinity group, “Women at Vedder Empowering Success” (WAVES).

Ms. Hall represents a wide range of employers before state and federal courts and administrative agencies, as well as in arbitral forums, defending them against various claims, including single plaintiff and class allegations of employment discrimination, failure to accommodate disabilities, sexual harassment, wrongful and retaliatory discharge, breach of contract and violations of the FMLA and wage and hour laws. Ms. Hall has successfully argued procedural and employment discrimination issues in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit and has particular expertise in managing electronic discovery teams in complex litigation.

A significant portion of Ms. Hall’s daily practice involves providing practical advice to employers regarding risk management; effective employee discipline and discharge; conducting workplace investigations; accommodating disabilities and pregnancy; workplace violence; managing leaves of absence and complying with FMLA and state leave requirements; workforce reductions; drafting and reviewing employment, recruitment and staffing agreements; policy and handbook development; wage and hour compliance; and state and federal employment laws. She frequently trains clients and employer groups on many of these topics.  Ms. Hall also has extensive experience drafting and negotiating severance, settlement and conciliation agreements on behalf of employer clients.

In 2017 and 2018, Ms. Hall was recommended by The Legal 500 United States for the Labor and Employment Disputes (including collective actions): Defense category. In 2018, she was named to the Crain’s Custom Media “Chicago Notable Women Lawyers” list. She also was selected as an Emerging Lawyer, an affiliate of Leading Lawyers, from 2015 to 2019. From 2010 to 2015, Ms. Hall was selected for inclusion as an Illinois Rising Star, and Super Lawyers named her one of the “Top Women Attorneys in Illinois” in the “Rising Star” category in 2013 and 2014.

Read more about Elizabeth N. HallEmail
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Employment & Labor
  • Blog:
    Vedder Works
  • Organization:
    Vedder Price PC
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo