(a)Whenever an employer enters into a contract of employment with an employee for services to be rendered within this state and the contemplated method of payment of the employee involves commissions, the contract shall be in writing and shall set forth the method by which the commissions shall be computed and paid.
(b)The employer shall give a signed copy of the contract to every employee who is a party thereto and shall obtain a signed receipt for the contract from each employee. In the case of a contract that expires and where the parties nevertheless continue to work under the terms of the expired contract, the contract terms are presumed to remain in full force and effect until the contract is superseded or employment
is terminated by either party.
(c)As used in this section, “commissions” has the meaning set forth in Section 204.1. For purposes of this section only, “commission” does not include any of the following:
(1)Short-term productivity bonuses such as are paid to retail clerks.
(2)Temporary, variable incentive payments that increase, but do not decrease, payment under the written contract.
(3)Bonus and profit-sharing plans, unless there has been an offer by the employer to pay a fixed percentage of sales or profits as compensation for work to be performed.
Notes of Decisions
Swafford v. Int'l Bus. Machs. Corp., 383 F. Supp. 3d 916 (N.D. Cal. 2019).
· cites it 20× “California Labor Code § 2751 Swafford claims that IBM violated California Labor Code § 2751.”
Lett v. Paymentech, Inc., 81 F. Supp. 2d 992 (N.D. Cal. 1999).
· cites it 2× “Lett’s claims under California Labor Code sections 2751 and 2752 are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
Swafford v. Int'l Bus. Machines Corp. (N.D. Cal. 2019).
· cites it 15× “Code § 12 17200, claim fails because it is derivative of Swafford’s other insufficient claims and because IBM 13 satisfied California Labor Code Section 2751. Id. at 21–23.”
Walker v. Stryker Corp. (S.D. Cal. 2023).
· cites it 10× “14 Additionally, Plaintiff argues that the Stryker Orthopaedics Overview could not have 15 changed Plaintiff’s commission structure because it does not comply with California 16 Labor Code § 2751.”
Harper v. Charter Commc'ns, LLC (E.D. Cal. 2021).
· cites it 5× “” Cal. Labor Code § 2751 (b). Charter argues that 20 plaintiffs’ claim fails as a matter of law because § 2751(b) no 21 longer provides a private right of action.”
Barajas v. Carriage Cemetery Servs. of California, Inc. (N.D. Cal. 2019).
· cites it 5× “4 Although not entirely clear, Plaintiffs also suggest that notice 23 3 In the original complaint as well as the first amended complaint (the latter being filed on April 24 10, 2019), Plaintiffs asserted a violation of California Labor Code § 2751 and claimed civil penalties…”
Comin v. Int'l Bus. Machines Corp. (IBM) (N.D. Cal. 2021).
· cites it 2× “Comin alleges that 16 IBM had a practice of not providing sales representatives with a written contract about 17 commissions, which Section 2751 requires, and failing to pay commissions as they came due. 18 IBM asks to dismiss the Labor Code and UCL claims under Federal Rule of…”
Beard v. Int'l Bus. Machines Corp. (N.D. Cal. 2019).
“7 In November 2018, Beard filed this civil action asserting (1) violation of California’ □ 8 || Labor Code Sections 2751 and 221, (2) violation of California’s Unfair Competition Law (UCL), 9}| (3) race discrimination, (4) unjust enrichment, (5) fraudulent misrepresentation, and…”
Beard v. Int'l Bus. Machines Corp. (N.D. Cal. 2020).
“Cal. Labor Code § 2751 (b). These requirements apply to the 19 instant action because it is undisputed that IBM employed Beard and “the contemplated method 20 of payment” involved commissions.”
Comin v. Int'l Bus. Machines Corp. (IBM) (N.D. Cal. 2023).
“Comin alleged that IBM had a 13 practice of not providing sales representatives with a written contract about commissions, which 14 Section 2751 requires, and failing to pay commissions as they came due. The Court denied the first 15 application for preliminary approval on…”
Lopez v. Smiths Detection, Inc. (S.D. Cal. 2021).
“at 11 13 (citing Cal. Labor Code § 2751 ). Further, Plaintiff argues that there is no exhaustion 14 requirement.”
— Cal. Labor Code § 2751(b) — 1 case
Harper v. Charter Commc'ns, LLC (E.D. Cal. 2021).
“” Cal. Labor Code § 2751 (b). Charter argues that 20 plaintiffs’ claim fails as a matter of law because § 2751(b) no 21 longer provides a private right of action.”
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.