What is an Aggrieved Employee?
In PAGA litigation, a wronged employee is able to sue their company. The law states that an aggrieved employee is a person who was employed by the company in question and who suffered a minimum of one of the alleged violations. To challenge such an individual, a company would need to launch a PAGA defense with the help of an attorney to defend against PAGA claims.
In some situations, workers can file personal wage and hour lawsuits in addition to PAGA claims. Some companies have settled these individual claims in hopes that the worker will not have the ability to then carry out the claims under PAGA. In the case Kim v. Reins International California, Inc., the California Supreme Court decided that settling individual claims and maintaining PAGA claims would not prevent an employee from submitting a PAGA claim later addressing the same labor code violations that were dealt with on an individual level. Because of the potential for significant damages, a company should be sure to hire a PAGA defense attorney to launch a PAGA defense.
While it may appear that this case had a major effect, its impact has been somewhat reduced due to many settlements lacking an exception for PAGA claims in their release. Employers therefore must think about putting a covenant in their settlement that states the former employee cannot engage in a class action or PAGA litigation. A PAGA defense attorney can assist with this as part of a PAGA defense strategy.
What Types of Claims are Covered by PAGA?
Under PAGA litigation, workers in California have the ability to file claims for violations of the state’s Labor Code in order to receive compensation. It is important to note that these fines are distinct from the legal damages that may be obtained through an individual’s personal claim. To defend against this potential, an employer should hire a PAGA defense attorney to stage a PAGA defense.
Our PAGA attorney defend against PAGA claims in the three primary categories :
- Section 2699.5 of the California Labor Code outlines a range of labor laws under which employees can initiate PAGA claims. These laws pertain to issues like retaliation, discrimination, failure to pay wages upon termination, inadequate provision of rest and meal breaks, non-compliance with wage statement requirements, and other infringements. Within this section, there are approximately one hundred specified violations that fall under PAGA. To deal with these potential complexities, it is essential for employers to have an attorney to defend against PAGA litigation.
- PAGA claims may also be brought forth for violations related to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). This includes situations where employers fail to provide a safe and healthy work environment, neglect to implement safety protocols and provide protective equipment, or lack a proper program for preventing injuries. Notably, PAGA claims can be filed if employers terminate or lay off employees who refuse to work in an environment with health or safety violations. To counter these claims, it is vital for employers to hire a PAGA defense attorney to stage a PAGA defense.
- PAGA claims extend to violations beyond those explicitly mentioned in section 2699.5 or Cal OSHA. This category encompasses various labor-related transgressions, such as failing to provide paid sick leave, knowingly misclassifying employees as independent contractors, and contravening the labor code specific to certain specialized occupations (such as mining, door-to-door sales, lumber, and theater). To assist with handling these allegations, an employer should seek the expertise of a PAGA defense lawyer who can mount defend against PAGA claims.
However, it is worth noting that certain claims cannot be pursued under PAGA. According to the Labor Code, PAGA claims cannot be filed for any violation of a notice, posting, filing requirement of this code, or agency reporting except where the reporting or filing requirement involved workplace injury reporting or mandatory payroll. Furthermore, PAGA litigation, as per the Labor Code, is not applicable for the recovery of civil and administrative penalties associated with the workers’ compensation law.
Can an Arbitration Agreement Impact Legal Claims?
Angie Moriana, an employee of the river cruise company Viking Cruises in California, signed an arbitration agreement upon joining the company. This agreement included a provision known as a ‘class action waiver,’ which prevented her from filing a collective claim on behalf of herself and other employees, including a Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) claim. After leaving Viking, Ms. Moriana initiated a claim against the company for lost wages and other wage and hour violations experienced by her and fellow employees. The company defend against PAGA claims sought to compel Ms. Moriana into arbitration to address her individual claims, effectively dismissing the PAGA claims on behalf of other employees due to the presence of the arbitration agreement in their employment contracts. However, the California courts rejected Viking’s motion, along with the company’s class action waiver. Subsequently, Viking turned to the U.S. Supreme Court with a PAGA defense, filing an appeal.
In its ruling, the Supreme Court examined the conflict between the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) and PAGA litigation. Ultimately, the Court emphasized the significance of Ms. Moriana’s agreement to arbitration in her employment contract. It clarified that the purpose of the FAA is to uphold arbitration agreements, which are not intended to alter rights but rather to change the venue and process by which parties negotiate.
The Court distinguished between the representative nature of a class action plaintiff and a PAGA plaintiff. According to the Court, a class action plaintiff must genuinely represent the entire class, experiencing similar injuries. Conversely, a PAGA litigation plaintiff can bring a claim and join diverse labor grievances, even those for damages the plaintiff has not personally suffered. The Supreme Court affirmed its prior interpretations of the FAA, asserting that a state cannot compel an individual to forgo arbitration by eliminating informal and individualized arbitration procedures. Nevertheless, the Court did not assert that every waiver of representative or class actions is automatically protected by the FAA. Instead, it explained that a plaintiff filing a class action lawsuit acts on behalf of absent parties, properly representing their interests. PAGA, on the other hand, permits an individual to bring a claim on behalf of absent parties who are in entirely different circumstances than the plaintiff. Consequently, the Court concluded that state law cannot mandate an employer to arbitrate claims, including those under PAGA, that it did not agree to arbitrate.
The Court determined that Ms. Moriana was required to arbitrate each of her individual employment claims. The question remained regarding how to address her PAGA claims. The contract she had agreed to contained a severability clause, which meant that covered claims must be arbitrated even if others are not. However, the arbitration agreement did not encompass the PAGA litigation. Since Ms. Moriana’s personal claims necessitated arbitration, she could not pursue the PAGA lawsuit on behalf of the other absent parties. Consequently, the Court ruled that those claims should be dismissed.
Is the Enforcement of a Class Action Waiver Viable for Employers in California?
As per the Supreme Court’s ruling, not every class action waiver within arbitration contracts automatically holds enforceability. Given PAGA’s representative and joinder framework, if an individual brings unrelated claims, they may be severed and potentially dismissed if the plaintiff’s individual claims are subject to arbitration. Consequently, it is imperative for employers, as part of a PAGA defense, to ensure that their class action waiver and arbitration agreement incorporates a provision regarding severability savings. To ensure this, they should be sure to hire a PAGA defense attorney to defend against PAGA claims.
Undoubtedly, PAGA is likely to continue generating a significant amount of legal disputes and differing viewpoints. Therefore, employers in California should carefully scrutinize their arbitration agreements, particularly concerning matters of waiver and severability. Please contact our attorney to defend against PAGA claims for a free consultation.