(a)Any employer or other person acting on behalf of an employer who violates, or causes to be violated, a section of this chapter or any provision regulating hours and days of work in any order of the Industrial Welfare Commission shall be subject to a civil penalty as follows:
(1)For any initial violation, fifty dollars ($50) for each underpaid employee for each pay period for which the employee was underpaid in addition to an amount sufficient to recover underpaid wages.
(2)For each subsequent violation, one hundred dollars ($100) for each underpaid employee for each pay period for which
the employee was underpaid in addition to an amount sufficient to
recover underpaid wages.
(3)Wages recovered pursuant to this section shall be paid to the affected employee.
(b)If upon inspection or investigation the Labor Commissioner determines that a person had paid or caused to be paid a wage for overtime work in violation of any provision of this chapter, any provision regulating hours and days of work in any order of the Industrial Welfare Commission, or any applicable local overtime law, the Labor Commissioner may issue a citation. The procedures for issuing, contesting, and enforcing judgments for citations or civil penalties issued by the Labor Commissioner for a violation of this chapter shall be the same as those set out in Section 1197.1.
(c)In a
jurisdiction where a local entity has the legal authority to issue a citation against an employer for a violation of any applicable local overtime law, the Labor Commissioner, pursuant to a request from the local entity, may issue a citation against an employer for a violation of any applicable local overtime law if the local entity has not cited the employer for the same violation. If the Labor Commissioner issues a citation, the local entity shall not cite the employer for the same violation.
(d)The civil penalties provided for in this section are in addition to any other civil or criminal penalty provided by law.
(e)This
section
does not change the applicability of local overtime wage laws to any entity.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
70
cases (
25 in the last 5 years), 2006–2025 · leading case:
Culley v. Lincare Inc., 236 F. Supp. 3d 1184 (E.D. Cal. 2017).
Culley v. Lincare Inc., 236 F. Supp. 3d 1184 (E.D. Cal. 2017).
· cites it 6× “Civil Penalties Under California Labor Code § 558 Again contesting the sufficiency of Plaintiffs LWDA notice, Defendants argue that it was insufficient to allow her to pursue the civil penalties set out in California Labor Code § 558.”
Andrade v. Arby's Restaurant Grp., Inc., 225 F. Supp. 3d 1115 (N.D. Cal. 2016).
· cites it 3× “Claim 12: Andrade is Eligible for Civil Penalties Under Cal. Labor Code § 558 . California Labor Code § 558 provides civil penalties against employers payable to the affected employee for labor code or IWC wage order violations in the amount of $50 for initial violations to…”
Villacres v. Abm Indus. Inc., 189 Cal. App. 4th 562 (Cal. Ct. App. 2010).
· cites it 2× “NOTES [1] Labor Code section 558 states that, for an initial violation, an employer must pay a $50 penalty for each underpaid employee for each pay period of underpayment.”
Robles v. Agreserves, Inc., 158 F. Supp. 3d 952 (E.D. Cal. 2016).
· cites it 2× “11th Cause of Action — Labor Code § 558 Parties ’ Arguments Campo argues that summary judgment is appropriate because Labor Code § 558 provides for civil penalties, but does not create a private cause of action.”
Whitworth v. Solarcity Corp., 336 F. Supp. 3d 1119 (N.D. Cal. 2018).
· cites it 3× “2) Plaintiffs' Section 558 Claims are Not Subject to Arbitration SolarCity next insists that even if the Court is not persuaded that Epic implicitly overruled Sakkab , the Court should nonetheless compel arbitration of the PAGA claims to the extent that the claims are predicated…”
ZB, N.A. v. Superior Court, 448 P.3d 239 (Cal. 2019).
“As relevant here, Lawson’s complaint seeks “civil penalties against [ZB], including unpaid wages and premium wages per California Labor Code section 558.”2 (See §§ 558, 2699, subd.”
Ramirez v. Ghilotti Bros., 941 F. Supp. 2d 1197 (N.D. Cal. 2013).
· cites it 2× “Rather, it seeks only California Labor Code section 558 penalties under PAGA.”
Esparza v. KS Indus., L.P., 221 Cal. Rptr. 3d 594 (Cal. Ct. App. 5th 2017).
“Employee's argument is based on semantics and not substance. One substantive aspect of the claim is the financial reality that 100 percent of the "amount sufficient to recover underpaid wages" is paid to the affected employee.”
Atempa v. Pedrazzani, 238 Cal. Rptr. 3d 465 (Cal. Ct. App. 5th 2018).
“Labor Code section 558, 1 subdivision (a) provides that an employer "or other person acting on behalf of an employer" who violates or causes a violation of the state's applicable overtime laws shall be subject to a civil penalty.”
Jacquelin Davis v. O'Melveny & Myers, a California Ltd. Liab. Corp., 485 F.3d 1066 (9th Cir. 2007).
“In addition to claims under the FLSA, her nine-count complaint included claims for violations of California Labor Code §§ 558, 2698 and 2699, and for declaratory relief seeking a declaration that the DRP is unconscionable and that O’Melveny’s enforcement of its provisions and…”
Lawson v. ZB, N.A., 227 Cal. Rptr. 3d 613 (Cal. Ct. App. 5th 2017).
“The trial court's order states in pertinent part: "[T]he Court bifurcates this issue of unpaid wages and premium wages per *617 California Labor Code section 558 against Defendants and compels that issue to arbitration.”
Varsam v. Lab'y Corp. of Am., 120 F. Supp. 3d 1173 (S.D. Cal. 2015).
“5, which provides that a PAGA suit may be brought for violations of specified Labor Code sections. 1 (Doc 4-1 at 16-19.) However, *1184 PAGA provides, - “Notwithstanding ■ any other provision of law, any provision of this code that provides for a civil penalty to be assessed and…”
— Cal. Labor Code § 558(a) — 5 cases
Whitworth v. Solarcity Corp., 336 F. Supp. 3d 1119 (N.D. Cal. 2018).
“2) Plaintiffs' Section 558 Claims are Not Subject to Arbitration SolarCity next insists that even if the Court is not persuaded that Epic implicitly overruled Sakkab , the Court should nonetheless compel arbitration of the PAGA claims to the extent that the claims are predicated…”
— Cal. Labor Code § 558(a)(2) — 1 case
— Cal. Labor Code § 558(a)(3) — 1 case
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.