Successor liability for wage and hour violations broadened in California
Prior to the beginning of this year, the California legislature enacted a new bill that can now significantly impact merger and sales agreements by broadening successor liability for wage and hour violations. The new bill dubbed as A Fair Day’s Pay Act (SB 588)[1] received Governor Jerry Brown’s assent on January 1st and intends to counter any concerns about employer wage theft and establishing bond requirements for employers that fail to pay owed wages to workers.
The SB 588 also empowers the Commissioner to seek payment from successor employers in those cases where “substantially the same work in substantially the same working conditions under substantially the same supervisors” occurs or the employer “produces substantially the same products or offers substantially the same services, and has substantially the same body of customers.” [See Section 4 (Addition of Section 238 (e)(1) & (2) to the Labor Code)].
Furthermore, the Commissioner has been vested with the power to levy bank accounts or personal property of a company owner who violates state wage law. [See Section 1 (Addition of Chapter 10 to Division 1 of Title 9 of Part 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure – Section 690.050 (b)]. He can also hold individuals personally liable for the conduct of an employer. [See Section 4 (Addition of Section 238 (f) to the Labor Code)]. The state’s Labor Commissioner can use any existing remedies available to judgment creditors to act as a levying officer to enforce claims of wage theft. [See Section 1 (Addition of Chapter 10 to Division 1 of Title 9 of Part 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure – Section 690.030 (a)].
The bill was initially introduced by California Senator Kevin De Leon addressing concerns about wage theft. In order to combat the problem of employers closing down their business and then reopening it with a new name with intent to dodge debts owed to workers or liens, SB 588 provides workers with the ability to chase down new entities.
In addition to the above, the new law requires an employer who is willing to remain in business to mandatorily post a bond dependent on the amount of wages at issue, ranging from $50,000 up to $150,000 with potential civil penalties and the possibilities of attorney fees’ as well. [See Section 4 (Addition of Section 238 (a) to the Labor Code)]. The changes brought forth by the Legislature will now result in much broader successor liability for employers.
Related Content
Indo-US Legal Sector Redefined: Consulate General of India, New York, SEPC India, and Draft n Craft Join Forces.
NEW YORK, UNITED STATES, June 29, 2023-The Indo-US Legal Sector – Redefining Relationships Conference, a groundbreaking event aimed at fostering...
Indo-US Legal Sector – Redefining Relationships Conference to Unite Legal Professionals from India and the United States
Indo-US Legal Sector – Redefining Relationships Conference to Unite Legal Professionals from India and the United States This...
Importance of Medical Records Summaries in Mass Tort Litigation
Mass torts cases are complex and often involve multiple plaintiffs who have suffered harm from the same product...
Care Plus and its Entities Agree to Pay $7.2 Million Against Anti-Kickback Allegations
On April 13, 2022, Care Plus Management, LLC (“Care Plus”), its founders Paul D. Weir and John R....
Copper Creek (Marysville) | Washington Court of Appeals on Effect of Bankruptcy Discharge on Statute of Limitations
On April 11, 2022, the Court of Appeals of Washington, Division 1 granted the motion for reconsideration and...
Federal District Court, California Dismisses Class Action Suit for Lack of Specific Jurisdiction
On April 01, 2022, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California ruled in dismissal of...
Southern District of Florida Grants Motion to Dismiss in Mass Class Action
On April 5, 2022, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida has granted motion...
First Department Ordered New Trial in Personal Injury Damages Lawsuit
On March 29, 2022, the Appellate Division, First Department, decided in Miller v. Camelot Communications Group, Inc., 2022...
Supreme Court of Georgia Rules out Product Liability due to Third Party’s Wrongful Behavior
The Supreme Court of Georgia on March 15, 2022, decided in Maynard v. Snapchat, Inc., Case that a...
Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA): Employers fate to be decided in 2022
On December 15, 2021, the United States Supreme Court announced to review the most consequential PAGA case Viking...
New Jersey Lawmakers Advance Bill To Allow Pandemic Insurance
A New Jersey Assembly committee on Wednesday advanced legislation that would permit insurers to offer coverage to policyholders...
Tech groups criticize Florida’s social media law as Unconstitutional.
Tech groups criticize Florida's social media law as unconstitutional.
New York ‘HERO’ Act requires employers to establish airborne infectious disease safety protocols.
The New York HERO Act (S.1034-B/A.2681-B), a critical bill requiring businesses to have enforceable safety standards to prevent...
Cost-padding, profit shedding law firms! Are you one of them?
Cost padding happens when a business deliberately inflates its costs than what it has incurred and then passes...
How to Write a Formal Demand Letter?
The process of settlement between the at-fault party and his or her insurance company includes negotiations and starts...
IP Docketing
An East coast based Intellectual Property Law firm was struggling with managing regular docketing work on a day-to-day...
The $100M IP Clash Between Lady Gaga and Lost Surfboards: Lessons for Your Law Practice
In March 2025, pop superstar Lady Gaga made headlines when she faced a lawsuit from California-based Lost Surfboards...
Chemical Hair Relaxer MDL No. 3060
Current Status (as of Early 2026) Scientific studies suggest a link between chemical hair relaxer use and cancer....
