AB 594: Labor Code Enforcement

Assembly Bill 594 by Assemblyman Brian Maienschein (D-San Diego) was recently amended to provide an alternative enforcement mechanism under the Labor Code. The bill would amend Labor Code Section 218, add Section 226.9, and add Chapter 8.

Section 1 of the bill makes seven legislative findings and declarations, including that wage theft is widespread in California, and is particularly egregious in low-wage industries, disproportionately impacting the most vulnerable workers. In addition, it is essential that we maximize the tools available to public enforcement agencies to give workers access to justice, hold companies that break the law accountable, and secure our public safety net.

Section 2 of the bill would add Chapter 8, titled “Alternative Enforcement,” to Division 1 of the Labor Code. It would define the term “public prosecutor.” A public prosecutor would be authorized to prosecute an action, either civil or criminal, for a violation of the Labor Code or to enforce the provisions of the Labor Code independently and without specific direction of the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement, the Division of Workers’ Compensation, or the Division of Occupational Safety and Health.

A public prosecutor would be allowed to seek injunctive relief to prevent continued violations of the Labor Code. A court would be required to award a prevailing plaintiff in that action its reasonable attorney’s fees and costs, including expert witness fees.

In legal actions initiated by a public prosecutor to enforce the Labor Code, any agreement between a worker and employer that purports to limit representative actions or to mandate private arbitration would be required to have no effect on the proceedings or on the authority of the public prosecutor to enforce the Labor Code.

Any motion or other court filing that seeks to compel a public prosecutor to arbitrate a claim due to any agreement between a worker and employer would be deemed frivolous and any subsequent appeal of the denial of any motion or other court filing would not stay the trial court proceedings.

Section 3 of the bill would amend Labor Code Section 218 to repeal the provisions related to the authority of the district attorney. Section 4 of the bill would add Labor Code Section 226.9 to provide that, as an alternative to existing process, the Labor Commissioner may issue a determination that a person or employer has violated existing law and can issue a citation by the Labor Commissioner. In addition, an employee would be entitled to either a statutory penalty or enforcement of a civil penalty for the same violation.