Average PAGA Settlement and Verdict

By Douglas Wade, Attorney

Email  |  Call (800) 484-4610

Get Smarter. Search FAQs.

PAGA Claim

The average PAGA settlement or judgement is truly an inaccurate method of determining the settlement value of a PAGA claim; this is demonstrated below with specific cases and PAGA settlement or verdict. The reason is the PAGA claim is based on arithmetic and the size of aggrieved employees.   In PAGA, the Legislature created an enforcement mechanism for aggrieved employees to file representative actions to recover penalties in cases in which there is no private cause of action as an alternative to enforcement by the Labor Commissioner.

An employee plaintiff suing, as here, under the PAGA, does so as the proxy or agent of the state’s labor law enforcement agencies. The act’s declared purpose is to supplement enforcement actions by public agencies, which lack adequate resources to bring all such actions themselves.

In a lawsuit brought under the act, the employee plaintiff represents the same legal right and interest as state labor law enforcement agencies—namely, recovery of civil penalties that otherwise would have been assessed and collected by the Labor Workforce Development Agency.

Gwin v. Natvan, Inc. $110,000 Judgment

2019 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 6629

Following the tentative verdicts, and a mandatory settlement conference, the parties reached a settlement agreement in February 2018. The settlement agreement encompassed both Gwin’s claims and those of another former Natvan employee named Amber Donnell, who separately had filed suit.

The settlement agreement included a recitation of the matter’s procedural history, including the tentative verdicts. Gwin and the defendants agreed to a stipulated money judgment of $110,000 in Gwin’s favor (not including PAGA penalties). This included $51,250 in economic damages (comprised of the amounts in the tentative verdict for unpaid overtime and vacation, and slightly larger amount for meal and rest breaks than set forth in the tentative verdicts), $9,500 in non-economic damages and $3,250 in statutory penalties (an amount greater than the tentative verdicts), $6,000 in punitive damages (the same amount in the tentative verdicts, which imposed $3,000 in punitive damages against Natvan and the same amount against Gi), and an unallocated $40,000 “settlement compromise payment.” [*8]

Paprock v. First Transit, Inc. $11.5 Million Judgment

(May 18, 2015, No. D064697) ___Cal.App.5th___ [2015 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 3430].)

By separate written order filed September 13, the court approved the parties’ written settlement agreement, [*10]  class counsel and the claims administrator; redefined the settlement class consistent with the terms of the agreement; authorized payment of attorney fees, costs, incentive awards and claims administration compensation; and entered a final judgment under which the court retained jurisdiction for purposes of effectuating the settlement (Judgment).

The Judgment effected the settlement, which required First Transit to pay up to $11.5 million — with up to approximately $6.89 million potentially going to the employee class members.

Alonzo v. First Transit, Inc. $10,000 Settlement

2018 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 7198

The parties conducted discovery and reached a settlement in February 2013 following two days of mediation. In June 2013 the trial court preliminarily approved a settlement pursuant to which First Transit agreed to pay up to $2 million to settle the class claims. As part of the settlement, the plaintiffs agreed to file a third amended complaint that added claims for civil penalties under PAGA, and First Transit agreed to pay $10,000 of the settlement amount to the Labor and Workforce Development Agency (LWDA) to resolve the PAGA claims. The settlement agreement did not distribute to the aggrieved employees any of the $10,000 allocated to the PAGA claims.

Amaral v. Cintas Corp. $258,9000

163 Cal. App. 4th 1157

Nor has Cintas shown the penalty award is unjust, arbitrary and oppressive, or confiscatory. Cintas claims the imposition of $258,900 in penalties is unjust, arbitrary and oppressive because the LWO is ambiguous [***108] and it was unclear whether or to what extent it applied to the work plaintiffs performed. However, several facts support the trial court’s decision to impose full penalties. Based on undisputed facts, the court found Cintas was on notice that the LWO applied to its operations but made no attempt to comply with the ordinance. Although the court stopped short of finding the company’s Labor Code violations to be “willful,” the court chastised Cintas’s “cavalier approach to fulfilling its contractual and statutory obligations” and suggested its conduct could be characterized as gross negligence or reckless disregard. Cintas also argues the penalties were unfairly inflated because it pays employees on a weekly basis. Under the court’s interpretation of former sections 210 and 225.5 that penalties are to be assessed per pay period, Cintas complains its penalties were arbitrarily higher than they would have been if it had paid its employees less often. The frequency of an employer’s [**618] pay periods can cut both ways, of course, since employees who are paid on a monthly basis will recover lower penalties than employees who receive paychecks more frequently. However, we must presume the trial court considered [***109] this argument and determined it did not warrant a reduction of Cintas’s penalties. This conclusion was well within the court’s discretion.

Finally, the $ 258,900 penalty assessment is not confiscatory. The court received evidence that Cintas’s parent company had $ 2.81 billion in sales and $ 272 million in profits during fiscal year 2004. The penalty award is certainly not “astronomical” in comparison. (See, e.g., City and County of San Francisco v. Sainez (2000) 77 Cal.App.4th 1302, 1318–1319 [92 Cal. Rptr. 2d 418] [approving $ 663,000 penalty for housing code violations, which represented about 28.4 percent of the defendants’ net worth].) The penalty award, which [***110] totaled less than one-third of the plaintiffs’ $ 804,783 damage award, was also proportional to Cintas’s misconduct. (See Kinney v. Vaccari (1980) 27 Cal.3d 348, 356 [165 Cal. Rptr. 787, 612 P.2d 877] [punitive assessment should be proportional to defendant’s misconduct, sufficient to achieve penalty’s deterrent purpose, and not constitutionally excessive].)

In sum, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in declining to reduce the PAGA penalties pursuant to section 2699, subdivision (e)(2).


Gwin v. Natvan, Inc. $60,000 Settlement

2019 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 6629

The parties also agreed to a stipulated money judgment of $60,000 in PAGA penalties “for Labor Code violations committed by Natvan” applicable to both the Gwin and Donnell lawsuits. The agreement included a formula by which Gwin and Donnell would participate in the PAGA penalties. The parties also executed a guaranty whereby Gi and his spouse agreed to guarantee and pay “all amounts included in the judgment” entered in connection with the settlement agreement, and that Gwin would have recourse to both the marital community property as well as the separate property of the guarantors.

Britto v. Zep Inc. $275,000

2015 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 6855

In January 2013, while the claims in this case were pursued by Britto and Cowan individually, Plaintiffs made a settlement demand of $1,007,331.08 ($910,500 of which was for PAGA penalties), excluding fees and costs.

In February 2013, Zep filed a motion for summary judgment or summary adjudication against Britto, in part on the ground that Britto had filed for bankruptcy without disclosing the claims he had against Zep.

While the summary judgment motion was pending, Zep made a settlement offer to Britto and Cowan pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 998 with respect to their individual claims and PAGA penalties. Plaintiffs accepted the offer on July 9, 2013.

By the terms of the offer of compromise, (1) Britto would receive $26,000, plus interest, costs, and attorney fees in an amount to be determined [*7] by the court “in accordance with law”; (2) Cowan would receive $22,000, plus interest, costs, and attorney fees in an amount to be determined by the court “in accordance with law”; (3) civil penalties would be paid to the California Labor and Workforce Development Agency (LWDA) pursuant to PAGA in the amount of $275,000, plus costs and attorney fees to be determined by the court “in accordance with law”; and (4) dismissal would become effective after the court approved the amount and allocation of PAGA penalties.

****

In addition, Zep argues, the $275,000 in PAGA penalties was a fraction of the $1.7 million Plaintiffs initially sought. However, the question is not whether Plaintiffs settled for less than they originally wanted, but whether they recovered an amount of significance. It is reasonable to conclude they did.

Hawkins v. City of L.A. $20,000

2019 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 5989

The jury found for plaintiffs on their Bane Act and whistleblower causes of action but against them on their federal civil rights claims. The jury also found against Hawkins on his FEHA cause of action. As to the Bane Act cause of action, the jury found that the City engaged in conduct that interfered or attempted to interfere by threats, intimidation, or coercion with plaintiffs’ right to complain about a supervisor engaging in conduct inconsistent with the Vehicle Code. As to the section 1102.5 cause of action for retaliation, the jury found that plaintiffs’ disclosure that a supervisor pressured hearing examiners to change decisions [*11] was a contributing factor to the City’s decision to fire plaintiffs. The City, however, did not prove it would have fired plaintiffs for legitimate, independent reasons even if they had not complained. The jury awarded Hawkins $238,531 and Kim $188,631 in damages, respectively.

The trial court assessed a $20,000 penalty under PAGA and awarded plaintiffs $1,054,286.88 in attorney fees.

Kaanaana v. Barrett Business Services, Inc. $53,293.50

29 Cal. App. 5th 778

The evidence established that employees lost three to five minutes of a 30-minute break. The court awarded $227,190.73 “for the 22,220 instances in which the unrounded time records reflect breaks of less than 30 minutes.”

“[F]or the employees who lost three to five minutes of a 30 minute break, they are not entitled to recover minimum wages for all or any portion of the meal period. [***8] Their exclusive remedy is a meal period premium under Labor Code section 226.7.”

No waiting time penalties applied, because no minimum wages were owed for the shortened meal periods “and the meal period premiums that are owing for the shortened meal periods are not a wage that could trigger waiting time penalties.”8Link to the text of the note

The court awarded the class $53,293.50 in civil penalties under PAGA. Plaintiffs sought civil penalties under section 558 for noncompliant meal periods totaling $409,950, but the court exercised its discretion to reduce the penalties to 13 percent of the full amount. (On average, plaintiffs were deprived of 13 percent of the 30-minute meal period.) The court found the full penalty would be “unjust, arbitrary and oppressive, or confiscatory” under section 2699, subdivision (e)(2). No civil penalties were owing under section 1197.1 for unpaid minimum wages.

Julie Gunther v Alaska Airlines $25,000,000

Superior Court Case No. 37-2017-00037849-CU-OE-NC

For the foregoing reasons, the Court enters judgment for Plaintiff. The Court awards the following monetary awards:

  • penalties to Plaintiff under Labor Code § 226(e) in the amount of $4,000.00
  • PAGA penalties (of which 75% shall be awarded to the State of California and 25% shall be awarded to the aggrieved-employees) in the amount of $25,010,158.00

Defendant is hereby ORDERED:

  • to submit to the Court a proposed method for distribution of the applicable penalties to the aggrieved-employees by October 11,2019, and
  • to comply with the equitable relief ordered herein.

Have a quick question? We answered nearly 2000 FAQs.

See all blogs: Business | Corporate | Employment

Most recent blogs:

What Happens When Employers Make False Promises

A false promise happens when a employer or hiring manager makes a statement on something the company can fulfill or avoid, but cannot or does not want to follow through with. You may bring a fraudulent inducement lawsuit against the employer for false promises for the harm you have suffered.

What to do if your employer doesn’t pay you?

If your employer failed to pay you for all of your work hours, a court could award you back pay. When your employer doesn't pay you, you should consult with an employment lawyer.

What to Do At a Job Fair to Impress Employers and Get the Interview

This article provides guidelines for job seekers to follow to ensure they are successful at career fairs. There are many things you can do to improve your chances of getting hired at a job fair.

Emotional Duress: How to Avoid

Emotional duress is an extremely unpleasant emotional response from someone else's conduct or actions. You can sue for money damages for anguish, or humiliation. This is known as emotional harm or mental anguish.

California Termination Laws

In California, an employee's employment may be terminated at the will of either party. Employees who are terminated must be paid all wages due at the time of termination. 

Late Paycheck Penalty

When your paycheck is late, the employer has to pay a penalty of one day's pay for each day that the paycheck is late, up to a maximum of thirty days.

How To Calm Down Before An Interview

12 simple ways on to calm your nerves before and during an interview is to use relaxation techniques. Before an interview, imagine how you would ideally want to present yourself in the interview and then visualize yourself in the interview.

How to Include a Referral in Your Cover Letter?

Your cover letter should start with mentioning the referral's name because it instantly qualifies you. A referral cover letter helps you to define the mutual contact that has referred you for the job.

Best Job Options For Someone With A Criminal Record

This article identifies jobs for someone with a criminal record; examples are: delivery service, freelance designer, truck driver, chef, etc.

What are Weingarten Rights?

Weingarten rights guarantee an employee the right to Union representation during an investigatory interview by their employer.

What Is Job Rotation: Advantages And Disadvantages

Job rotation is the practice of moving employees between roles or positions in a company. Job rotation temporarily assigns employees to other roles to teach them new skills, learn about other functions within the team, and develop relationships across the business.

What is the meaning of Pay Rate?

Pay rate is the total money a worker receives during regular working hours, excluding overtime. In order words, pay rate, also called salary rate or compensation rate, is the wage amount paid to an employee per hour, per day, or per task completed.

How can part-time or temporary work help you explore career choices?

Part-time or temporary work offers a practical way to explore exploring and understanding what career you want. Temporary work or part time work gives you the opportunity to discover your strengths, preferences, and passions without the long-term commitment required by full-time work.

Understanding Incentive Pay: Definition, Types, and Benefits Explained

Learn how different forms of incentive pay, from bonuses to commission, can drive business success and enhance workforce engagement. Discover the key benefits and best practices of implementing incentive pay strategies in your organization, essential for attracting and retaining top talent.

What Happens When You Get Audited EDD

Gain clarity on the EDD audit process with our comprehensive guide, detailing what happens when you get audited by the Employment Development Department, including steps to prepare and respond effectively." "Navigate the complexities of an EDD audit smoothly with our expert insights, exploring the implications, documentation requirements, and key strategies to manage the auditing process efficiently and confidently.

What is FMLA Intermittent Leave of Absence?

An employee uses their 12 weeks of unpaid leave intermittently under FMLA Intermittent leave, taking it off and on, unlike continuous family medical leave or a reduced work schedule. FMLA leave can be taken intermittently by employees – in separate blocks of time for a single qualifying reason – or on a reduced leave schedule, which involves reducing the employee's usual weekly or daily work schedule, when it is medically necessary.

What is a statutory employee?

A statutory employee is a salesperson, either traveling full-time or based in a city, who represents you and submits orders from wholesalers, retailers, contractors, or operators of establishments such as hotels and restaurants. The merchandise sold should be for resale, or the supplies should be for use in the buyer's business operation. For you, the principal business activity performed must be the salesperson's work.

What Does Staffing Agency Mean?

A staffing agency recruits employees for businesses that are seeking to fill certain positions. A staffing agency is a company that provides employees to work in another company on a temporary or permanent basis. 

Character Reference Letter Sample and Tips

A character reference letter offers employers insight into an individual's qualities and character traits through the perspective of a third party.

Exploring the Evolution of Supreme Court Rulings on Arbitration Agreement

This article explores the complex landscape of Supreme Court rulings on arbitration, particularly focusing on cases since 1997. We delved into key decisions and their implications for employment law and policy statements, providing a detailed analysis of the evolving legal context.

California’s Ban on Mandatory Arbitration in Employment Overturned by Ninth Circuit Court

The Ninth Circuit's decision on AB 51 is pivotal for California employer class action defense attorneys, impacting arbitration agreement enforceability in employment. The ruling aligns state law with the Federal Arbitration Act, underscoring arbitration's role in employment disputes.

What is EEO-1 Reporting? Reporting Requirements, Deadlines, and Penalties

The EEO-1 Component 1 report is an annual mandatory data collection. It calls for all private sector employers of 100 or more employees and federal contractors of 50 or more eligible employees with specified criteria to submit workforce demographic data, inclusive of data by job category, sex and race or ethnicity, to the EEOC.

What is shift differential pay? How It Is Calculated, Who Can Qualify for It, and Its Advantages

Shift differential is an increase in pay rate for working undesirable hours such as nights, weekends, weekends, or holiday. Shift Differential Pay: How It Is Calculated, Who Can Qualify for It, and Its Advantages

8 Types of Work Shifts

Work shifts can be categorized into various types, including Day Shifts, typically covering standard daytime hours; Night (or Graveyard) Shifts, operating during late-night to early morning; Swing (or Afternoon) Shifts, spanning late afternoon to late evening;

What happens if employers get caught working under the table?

If an employer is caught paying employees "under the table" – that is, in cash without providing paystubs or deducting taxes – there can be serious legal and financial consequences such as back taxes, penalties for not reporting wages, criminal charges, labor law violations, and employee lawsuits.

What Is Unpaid Time Off and How To Create A Company Policy For It

Unpaid time off is time away from work an employee can take without pay. Employees can use unpaid time off for any reasons such as for illness, vacation, and personal reasons.

How To Calculate Net Pay

Net pay is calculated by subtracting all deductions, such as taxes, Social Security, Medicare, and any other voluntary or mandatory withholdings (like retirement contributions or health insurance premiums), from the employee's gross pay.

California New Employee Forms

California companies must provide newly hired employees with forms, including employee withholdings.

Final paycheck law in California

In California, if an employer fires an employee, an employer must pay a final paycheck on the same day the employee is fired. If an employee quits employment, an employer is required to pay a final paycheck within 72 hours of the last shift.

What Is Time and A Half?

Time and a half mean an increased rate of pay for overtime hours, over 8 hours per day or those that exceed the 40-hour work week.

Free Consultation