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 § 229 (2026)

General Occupations

✓ leginfo export of Sept. 26, 2026 (applied Oct. 1, 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov JustiaCode on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Actions to enforce the provisions of this article for the collection of due and unpaid wages claimed by an individual may be maintained without regard to the existence of any private agreement to arbitrate. This section shall not apply to claims involving any dispute concerning the interpretation or application of any collective bargaining agreement containing such an arbitration agreement.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 73 cases (21 in the last 5 years), 1972–2026 · leading case: Perry v. Thomas, 482 U.S. 483 (1987).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Perry v. Thomas, 482 U.S. 483 (1987). · cites it 6× “" Cal. Lab. Code Ann. § 229 (West 1971). I Appellee, Kenneth Morgan Thomas, brought this action in California Superior Court against his former employer, Kidder, Peabody & Co.”
Nieto v. Fresno Beverage Co., 33 Cal. App. 5th 274 (Cal. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 5× “) Finally, VWB's petition pointed out that where the FAA is applicable, state laws interfering with enforcement of arbitration rights, such as California Labor Code section 229, are preempted by the FAA.”
Livadas v. Bradshaw, 512 U.S. 107 (1994). · cites it 3× “, Labor Code § 229) and rejected the defense that it was required by federal law, namely, § 301 of the Labor-Management Relations Act, 1947 (LMRA), 61 Stat.”
Carbajal v. CWPSC, Inc., 245 Cal. App. 4th 227 (Cal. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 2× “Carbajal opposed the motion, arguing (1) no enforceable arbitration agreement existed because CW Painting never signed the Agreement; (2) the FAA does not apply because CW Painting failed to present any evidence showing the Agreement involved interstate commerce; (3) Labor Code…”
Fosler v. Midwest Care Ctr. II, Inc., 928 N.E.2d 1 (Ill. App. Ct. 2d Dist. 2010). · cites it 6× “2d at 432 , quoting Cal. Lab.Code Ann. § 229 (West 1971). The Court noted that section 2 "`is a congressional declaration of a liberal federal policy favoring arbitration agreements, notwithstanding any state substantive or procedural policies to the contrary.”
Gentry v. Superior Court, 165 P.3d 556 (Cal. 2007). · cites it 2× “2d 426 [FAA preempted California statute (Lab.Code, § 229) that allowed maintenance of action for unpaid wages "without regard to the existence of any private agreement to arbitrate"].”
Carter v. SSC Odin Operating Co., LLC, 927 N.E.2d 1207 (Ill. 2010). · cites it 2× “at 2522-23 , quoting Cal. Lab. Code Ann. §229 (West 1971). The Court began its analysis by strongly emphasizing that section 2 of the FAA embodied a “liberal federal policy favoring arbitration agreements, notwithstanding any state substantive or procedural policies to the…”
Stirlen v. Supercuts, Inc., 51 Cal. App. 4th 1519 (Cal. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 2× “2520 ] [Labor Code section 229, providing that wage collection actions may be maintained without regard to an agreement to arbitrate]; Southland Corp.”
Broughton v. Cigna Healthplans, 988 P.2d 67 (Cal. 1999). · cites it 2× “As the court explained: "An agreement to arbitrate is valid, irrevocable, and enforceable, as a matter of federal law, [citation] `save upon such grounds as exist at law or in equity for the revocation of any contract.' 9 U.S.C. § 2 .... Thus state law, whether of legislative or…”
Keating v. Superior Court, 645 P.2d 1192 (Cal. 1982). · cites it 2× “Code, § 229) was not preempted by rules promulgated by the New York Stock Exchange pursuant to federal law: "`The principle to be derived from our decisions is that federal regulation of a field of commerce should not be deemed preemptive of state regulatory power in the absence…”
Khalatian v. Prime Time Shuttle, 237 Cal. App. 4th 651 (Cal. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 2× “Federal preemption California Labor Code section 229 provides that a cause of action that seeks to collect due and unpaid wages pursuant to Labor Code sections 200 through 244 can be maintained in court, despite an agreement to arbitrate.”
Kinkel v. Cingular Wireless, LLC, 857 N.E.2d 250 (Ill. 2006). “at 2523 , quoting Cal. Lab. Code §229 (West 1971). The Court noted that section 2 “ ‘is a congressional declaration of a liberal federal policy favoring arbitration agreements, notwithstanding any state substantive or procedural policies to the contrary.”
Show all 73 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.