Search form

California Labor Commissioner’s Enforcement Powers Set to Expand Dramatically

By Jamerson C. Allen
  • December 7, 2015

Effective January 1, 2016, California employers face a Labor Commissioner with significantly enhanced authority to enforce judgments for unpaid wages under California’s Fair Day’s Pay Act.

The new law seeks to prevent “wage theft” by authorizing the Labor Commissioner to issue stop work orders against employers (and successor employers) who have judgments against them for nonpayment of wages, to issue levies against employers’ bank accounts and accounts receivable, and to place liens against employers’ real and personal property.

The law also imposes criminal and personal liability against certain individuals acting on behalf of an employer, including owners, officers, directors, or managing agents, for various Labor Code violations. The law’s key provisions are highlighted below.

Cessation of Operations: Bond Requirement

An employer that fail to satisfy a final judgment for nonpayment of wages 30 days after the time to appeal has expired (and where no appeal is pending) must cease operations, unless it has obtained a bond (depending on the amount owed, from $50,000 to $150,000) and filed a copy of the bond with the Labor Commissioner. Bonds must be maintained until all judgments are satisfied.

Upon receiving notice of an unpaid judgment by a predecessor employer, a successor employer will be “deemed” the predecessor employer and subject to the bond requirements if:

  • the successor’s employees are engaged in substantially the same work and under substantially the same working conditions and supervisors as the predecessor; or
  • the successor has substantially the same production process or operations, produces or offers substantially the same products or services, and has substantially the same customers as the predecessor.

The Labor Commissioner can impose a $2,500 civil penalty for failure to comply with this provision against an employer and “any other person acting on behalf of an employer.” Employers that fail to pay a civil penalty shall be subject to additional penalties, up to $100,000.

Cessation of Operations: Stop Work Orders

The Labor Commissioner may issue a stop work order to employers conducting business in violation of the bond requirements. Employers must pay employees affected by any ordered work stoppage for up to 10 days’ lost time. An employer, owner, officer, director, or managing agent who fails to comply with a stop work order is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment of up to 60 days or by a fine not exceeding $10,000.

Levies and Liens

The law authorizes the Labor Commissioner to use any existing remedies available to a judgment creditor and to act as a levying officer when enforcing a judgment for unpaid wages. Thus, if an employee brings a successful wage claim against an employer, the Labor Commissioner can levy on the employer’s bank accounts, accounts receivable, or other intangibles and can place a lien against an employer’s real or personal property for the full amount of wages, interest, penalties, and attorneys’ fees (if applicable).

Individual Liability

The law also imposes individual liability on owners, officers, directors, or managing agents of an employer in the same manner as the employer for violations of any provision regulating minimum wages or hours and days of work in any state Industrial Welfare Commission (IWC) Wage Order, or the following sections of the Labor Code:

  • waiting time penalties (Section 203),
  • itemized wage statements (Section 226),
  • providing rest, meal and recovery periods (Section 226.7),
  • actions to recover unpaid minimum wages and overtime (Sections 1193.6 and 1194), or
  • expense reimbursements (Section 2802).


California employers and business owners face costly new liabilities for failing to comply with California’s many wage and hour laws. Employers should review their wage and hour policies and practices to ensure that they are legally compliant.

Further, employers should consider training managers and supervisors on the need to comply with California’s wage hour laws and the risk of individual civil and criminal liability if they fail to do so.

Employers engaged in corporate transactions should consult experienced counsel on the implications of the successor liability provisions of this new law.

Jackson Lewis attorneys are available to answer inquiries regarding this and other workplace developments.

©2015 Jackson Lewis P.C. This material is provided for informational purposes only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice nor does it create a client-lawyer relationship between Jackson Lewis and any recipient. Recipients should consult with counsel before taking any actions based on the information contained within this material. This material may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Reproduction of this material in whole or in part is prohibited without the express prior written consent of Jackson Lewis P.C., a law firm that built its reputation on providing workplace law representation to management. Founded in 1958, the firm has grown to more than 900 attorneys in major cities nationwide serving clients across a wide range of practices and industries including government relations, healthcare and sports law. More information about Jackson Lewis can be found at

See AllRelated Articles You May Like

September 13, 2019

California Supreme Court Rejects Claim for Unpaid Wages under PAGA

September 13, 2019

Putting an end to employees’ backdoor attempts to recover unpaid wages in Private Attorneys General Act-only actions under California Labor Code Section 558, the California Supreme Court has ruled against allowing such claims. ZB, N.A., et al. v. Superior Court, No. S246711 (Sept. 12, 2019). This is surprising, as the Court provided... Read More

September 13, 2019

California Worker Misclassification Bill Closer to Enactment

September 13, 2019

The California Assembly has passed a bill that would require workers to be classified as employees if the employer exerts control over how the workers perform their tasks or if their work is part of the employer’s regular business. Assembly Bill 5 (AB 5) passed by a vote of 61-16 in the Assembly. Governor Gavin Newsom has stated his... Read More

September 9, 2019

Non-Agricultural Employers May Use Workweek Averaging to Satisfy State Minimum Wage Obligations in Washington

September 9, 2019

The Washington Supreme Court has confirmed that non-agricultural employers may use a workweek averaging methodology to satisfy the Washington Minimum Wage Act. Sampson et al. v. Knight Transportation Inc. et al., No. 96264-2 (Sept. 5, 2019). In other words, non-agricultural employers can satisfy their state minimum wage... Read More