Cal. Codes » Labor Code / DIVISION 2. EMPLOYMENT REGULATION AND SUPERVISION / PART 1. COMPENSATION / CHAPTER 1. Payment of Wages / ARTICLE 1. General Occupations
California Codes

Cal. Labor Code § 219 (2026)

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

(a)Nothing in this article shall in any way limit or prohibit the payment of wages at more frequent intervals, or in greater amounts, or in full when or before due, but no provision of this article can in any way be contravened or set aside by a private agreement, whether written, oral, or implied.

(b)The state employer does not violate this section by authorizing employees who quit, or are discharged from, their employment with the state to take payment for any unused or accumulated vacation, annual leave, holiday leave, sick leave to which the employee is otherwise entitled due to a disability retirement, or time off to which the employee is entitled by reason of previous overtime work where compensating time off was given by the appointing power, as provided in Section 201 or 202.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 34 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1994–2025 · leading case: David Valles John Breslin, & Members of the Gen. Pub. Similarly Situated v. Ivy Hill Corp., 410 F.3d 1071 (9th Cir. 2005).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
David Valles John Breslin, & Members of the Gen. Pub. Similarly Situated v. Ivy Hill Corp., 410 F.3d 1071 (9th Cir. 2005). · cites it 4× “” Cal. Lab.Code § 219. In the context of § 219 and § 226.”
Soremekun v. Thrifty Payless, Inc., 509 F.3d 978 (9th Cir. 2007). · cites it 2× “Code § 219 (no provision in the article, including sections 202 and 203, “can in any way be contravened or set aside by a private agreement, whether written, oral, or implied”); id. § 222 (“It shall be unlawful, in case of any wage agreement arrived at through collective…”
Gomez v. J. Jacobo Farm Labor Contractor, Inc., 188 F. Supp. 3d 986 (E.D. Cal. 2016). · cites it 3× “12 at 4-5 (citing Cal. Labor Code § 219 ); see also Cal. Labor Code § 1194 (“Notwithstanding any agreement to work for a lesser wage.”
Medex v. McCabe, 811 A.2d 297 (Md. 2002). · cites it 2× “, Cal. Lab.Code § 219(a) (2002) ("[N]o provision of this article can in any way be contravened or set aside by a private agreement, whether written, oral, or implied.”
McLean v. State of California, 377 P.3d 796 (Cal. 2016). · cites it 2× “authorizfes] employees who quit, or are discharged from, their' employment with the state to take payment for any unused or accumulated vacation, annual leave, holiday leave, sick leave to which the employee is otherwise entitled due to a disability retirement, or time off to…”
Livadas v. Bradshaw, 512 U.S. 107 (1994). “Under another provision of California law, Labor Code § 219, the protections of §201 (and of other rules governing the frequency and form of wage payments) “can [not] in any way be contravened or set aside by private agreement, whether written, oral, or implied,” although…”
Lang v. Skytap, Inc., 347 F. Supp. 3d 420 (N.D. Cal. 2018). · cites it 2× “Cal. Labor Code § 219 . While the burden of proving why a contractual provision should not be enforced typically is borne by the party opposing enforcement, the burden shifts when the claims at issue are based on *430 unwaivable rights created by the California legislature.”
Cal. Trucking Ass'n v. Julie Su, 903 F.3d 953 (9th Cir. 2018). “See Cal. Labor Code §§ 219 , 1194, 2804. 18 CAL.”
Pinela v. Neiman Marcus Grp., Inc., 238 Cal. App. 4th 227 (Cal. Ct. App. 2015). “(Lab. Code, §§ 219, subd. (a), 1194, subd.”
Haralson v. United Airlines, Inc., 224 F. Supp. 3d 928 (N.D. Cal. 2016). “2005) (explaining that “any provision of the collective bargaining agreement purporting to waive the right to meal periods would be of no force or effect” because “[t]he right in question is plainly nonnegotiable”) (citing Cal. Lab. Code § 219 ; Balcorta, 208 F.3d at 1111 ).”
Intershop Commc'ns, Ag v. Superior Court, 127 Cal. Rptr. 2d 847 (Cal. Ct. App. 2002). “) [3] Labor Code section 219 reads as follows: "Nothing in this article shall in any way limit or prohibit the payment of wages at more frequent intervals, or in greater amounts, or in full when or before due, but no provision of this article can in any way be contravened or set…”
Bonilla v. Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide, Inc., 407 F. Supp. 2d 1107 (C.D. Cal. 2005). · cites it 2× “”)) Thus, argues Defendant, because whether or not Plaintiffs were entitled to a meal period for a five hour work period or whether they waived this right depends on an interpretation of the Local 11 CBA, the claims are preempted.”
Show all 34 citing cases →
— Cal. Labor Code § 219(a) — 1 case
Medex v. McCabe, 811 A.2d 297 (Md. 2002). “, Cal. Lab.Code § 219(a) (2002) ("[N]o provision of this article can in any way be contravened or set aside by a private agreement, whether written, oral, or implied.”
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.