Search form

New York Legislature Passes Bill Allowing Liens on Employers for Alleged Wage Claims

By Jeffrey W. Brecher and Heather C. Hili
  • July 15, 2019

A bill aimed at increasing protections for employer “wage theft” by allowing an employer’s current or former employee, or the New York State Department of Labor (NYSDOL), to place a lien on the employer’s interest in real or personal property for the value of a wage claim, plus liquidated damages, has passed the New York State Legislature. If signed by Governor Andrew Cuomo, the law will become effective 30 days after signing.

Examples of employer wage theft include minimum wage violations, failing to pay overtime, and not paying tipped workers the difference between their tips and the legal minimum wage.

The bill permits workers to put a lien on an employer’s property in connection with an alleged “wage claim.” A “wage claim” is defined as a claim for a violation of New York Labor Law Sections 170 (hours of labor for domestic workers), 193 (deductions from wages), 196-d (gratuities), or 652 and 673 (minimum wages), as well as the related regulations and wage orders promulgated by the labor commissioner. A “wage claim” also includes a claim for wages due to an employee pursuant to an employment contract that were unpaid in violation of that contract, and a claim for violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) (e.g., overtime claims).

An employee’s lien for a wage claim may not be placed on an employer’s bank accounts or goods.

The lien may be filed at any time, but not later than three years following the end of the employment giving rise to the wage claim.

If the bill becomes law, it could have unintended negative consequences for employers operating in New York. Of the handful of other states that already allow similar liens on employers, only one (Wisconsin) allows such liens based solely on allegations, rather than a finding of liability. Opponents of the bill have identified a number of other concerns for the state’s business community should the bill become law, including a potential freeze to credit needed by small businesses when a lien is filed because banks may not extend credit under such circumstances. They also argue that the bill would give employees unfair leverage.

Jackson Lewis will continue to monitor the status of this bill. In the meantime, if you have any questions about this bill or any other wage and hour issue, please contact the Jackson Lewis attorney(s) with whom you regularly work.

©2019 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

October 8, 2019

DOL Proposes FLSA Regulations to Close Door on ‘80/20’ Rule, Implement Tip Pooling Amendments

October 8, 2019

The Department of Labor (DOL) published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) on October 8, 2019, to eliminate the “20% Rule,” or “80/20 Rule,” under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The 20% Rule, which first appeared in a DOL Field Operations Handbook (FOH) in 1988, requires employers to pay tipped employees the full minimum... Read More

October 7, 2019

No California Waiting-Time, Inaccurate Wage Statement Penalties Based on Unpaid Meal Period Premiums, Court Rules

October 7, 2019

Do meal period premiums trigger derivative liability for waiting-time penalties and inaccurate wage statements? The California Court of Appeal has ruled in the negative on the oft-asked question. Naranjo et al. v. Spectrum Security Services, Inc., No. B256232 (Cal. Ct. App. Sept. 26, 2019). The Court ruled that actions to recover... Read More

October 7, 2019

Common Mistakes Companies Make with Gig Economy Workers

October 7, 2019

It is no secret that traditional employers often benefit from non-traditional workplace arrangements available in the gig economy, such as relief from paying unemployment insurance and worker’s compensation plans or being exempt from many minimum wage or overtime laws that apply to the traditional employer-employee relationship.... Read More

Related Practices