Cal. Codes » Labor Code
California Codes

Cal. Labor Code § 1198 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov JustiaCode on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

The maximum hours of work and the standard conditions of labor fixed by the commission shall be the maximum hours of work and the standard conditions of labor for employees. The employment of any employee for longer hours than those fixed by the order or under conditions of labor prohibited by the order is unlawful.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 34 cases (19 in the last 5 years), 2002–2025 · leading case: Liliana Canela v. Costco, 971 F.3d 845 (9th Cir. 2020).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Liliana Canela v. Costco, 971 F.3d 845 (9th Cir. 2020). · cites it 2× “Plaintiff, a Costco Wholesale Corporation employee, filed a state class action complaint alleging that Costco violated California Labor Code § 1198 by failing to provide her and other employees suitable seating.”
Culley v. Lincare Inc., 236 F. Supp. 3d 1184 (E.D. Cal. 2017). · cites it 3× “Civil Penalties Under California Labor Code § 1198 Defendants finally challenge Plaintiffs ability to recover another set of penalties under California Labor Code § 1198 for all alleged labor code violations.”
McKenzie v. Fed. Express Corp., 765 F. Supp. 2d 1222 (C.D. Cal. 2011). · cites it 3× “Cal. Lab.Code § 1198 (emphasis added). This provision incorporates by reference California’s Wage Orders, whereby a violation of a Wage Order also violates Section 1198: In our view, the phrase “conditions of labor prohibited by the order,” as found in sections 1198 and 1199,…”
Moore v. Ulta Salon, Cosmetics & Fragrance, Inc., 311 F.R.D. 590 (C.D. Cal. 2015). · cites it 4× “The FAC asserts claims for: (1) failure to pay overtime compensation, Cal. Lab.Code § 1198, et seq.; (2) failure to compensate for all hours worked, Cal.”
Palacio v. Progressive Ins., 244 F. Supp. 2d 1040 (C.D. Cal. 2002). “Cal. Labor Code § 1198 . Like its predecessors, the Commission does so through the passage of wage orders, which it has the power to rescind or amend upon its own motion or after a petition.”
Gallardo v. AT & T Mobility, LLC, 937 F. Supp. 2d 1128 (N.D. Cal. 2013). “On August 19, 2011, Plaintiffs filed a complaint in Alameda County Superior Court, alleging that Defendant violated California Labor Code section 1198 by failing to provide seating, in violation of Wage Order 7-2001, Section 14.”
Perine v. ABF Freight Sys., Inc., 457 F. Supp. 2d 1004 (C.D. Cal. 2006). “The lawsuit was filed under California Labor Code § 1198. Thus, this Court has jurisdiction solely under 28 U.”
Rodriguez v. BELFOR USA Grp., Inc. (N.D. Cal. 2025). · cites it 3× “7, 516, and 20 1198 (rest period violations); (6) violations of California Labor Code §§ 226(a), 1174(d), and 21 1198 (non-compliant wage statements and failure to maintain accurate payroll records); (7) 22 violations of California Labor Code §§ 201 and 202 (wages not timely…”
Liliana Canela v. Costco (9th Cir. 2020). · cites it 2× “Plaintiff, a Costco Wholesale Corporation employee, filed a state class action complaint alleging that Costco violated California Labor Code § 1198 by failing to provide her and other employees suitable seating.”
Eliazar Olea v. Teichert Pipelines, Inc. (C.D. Cal. 2021). · cites it 2× “12 , 1194, 1197, & 1198; (2) Failure to Pay Overtime Compensation, Cal. Lab. Code §§ 1198 & 510; (3) Failure to Pay Meal Period Compensation, Cal.”
Reyna v. WestRock Co. (N.D. Cal. 2020). · cites it 2× “Further, California Labor Code § 1198 1 provides that “[t]he maximum hours of work and the standard conditions of labor fixed by the 2 commission shall be the maximum hours of work and the standard conditions of labor for 3 employees. The employment of any employee for longer…”
Rodriguez v. BELFOR USA Grp., Inc. (N.D. Cal. 2025). · cites it 2× “7, 512(a), 516, and 1198 (failure to provide meal periods); (4) California Labor 1 Labor Code sections 226(a), 1174(d), and 1198 (non-compliant wage statements and failure to 2 maintain payroll records); (6) California Labor Code sections 201 and 202 (wages not timely paid 3…”
Show all 34 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.