O.C.G.A. § 34-7-2 (2019)
Payment of wages by lawful money, checks, or credit transfer; selection of payment dates by employer
(a) As used in this Code section, the term ‘‘payroll card account’’ means an account that is directly or indirectly established through a person, firm, or corporation employing wageworkers or other employees and to which electronic fund transfers of the wages or salary of such employees are made on a recurring basis, whether the account is operated or managed by such person, firm, or corporation or a third-party payroll processor, a depository institution, or any other person. (b) Every person, firm, or corporation, including steam and electric railroads, but not including farming, sawmill, and turpentine industries, employing skilled or unskilled wageworkers in manual, mechanical, or clerical labor, including all employees except officials, superintendents, or other heads or subheads of departments who may be employed by the month or year at stipulated salaries, shall make wage and salary payments to such employees or to their authorized representatives (1) by lawful money of the United States, (2) by check, (3) with the consent of the employee, by authorization of electronic credit transfer to his or her account with a bank, trust company, or other financial institution authorized by the United States or one of the several states to receive deposits in the United States, or (4) by credit to a payroll card account. Such payments shall be made on such dates during the month as may be decided upon by such person, firm, or corporation; provided, however, that the dates so selected shall be such that the month will be divided into at least two equal periods; and provided, further, that the payments made on each such date shall in every case correspond to the full net amount of wages or earnings due the employees for the period for which the payment is made.
(c) A person, firm, or corporation that elects pursuant to subsection (b) of this Code section to make wage and salary payments by using credit to a payroll card account shall provide the employee with each of the following: (1) A written explanation of any fees associated with the payroll card account offered to the employee. For all employees employed on the date a person, firm, or corporation elects to make such wage and salary payments by using credit to a payroll card account, such written explanation shall be provided at least 30 days prior to the date such payroll card account is to become available. For any employee hired after the date of such election, the written explanation shall be provided at the time of hiring. A form shall be provided simultaneously with the written explanation of fees allowing employees to opt out of receiving such payments as credit to a payroll card account as provided in paragraphs (2) and (3) of this subsection. Such form shall also be made generally available to employees; (2) The ability to opt out of receiving such payments as credit to a payroll card account by submitting in writing a request for a check; and (3) The ability to opt out of receiving such payments as credit to a payroll card account by providing the proper designation and authorization for an electronic credit transfer.
History
(Ga. L. 1919, p. 388, § 1; Code 1933, § 66-102; Ga. L. 1973, p. 672, § 1; Ga. L. 1982, p. 3, § 34; Ga. L. 1984, p. 22, § 34; Ga. L. 2015, p. 596, § 1/SB 88.)
Annotations
Law reviews. - For annual survey of labor and employment law, see 57 Mercer L. Rev. 251 (2005). For article, ‘‘Georgia’s ‘Bring Your Gun to Work’ Law May Not Have the Firepower to Trouble Georgia Employers After All,’’ see 14 (No. 7) Ga. St. B. J. 12 (2009). For comment criticizing Messenger v. State, 209 Ga. 340, 72 S.E.2d 460 (1952), see 4 Mercer L. Rev. 371 (1953).
JUDICIAL DECISIONS Liability for violations of wage payment provisions. - Consultant employed by a labor pool was not an ‘‘employer’’ under Georgia law and, therefore, was not subject to liability for violations of O.C.G.A. §§ 34-7-2 and 34-7-3. Sakas v. Settle Down Enters., Inc., 90 F. Supp. 2d 1267 (N.D. Ga. 2000).
Action claiming forfeiture based on clause in incentive contract. - Trial court properly granted judgment on the pleadings to companies in a former employee’s action alleging violations of O.C.G.A. § 34-7-2 because the employee did not file an action claiming that a forfeiture clause in a stock incentive plan
constituted a violation of wage requirements within the relevant two-year statute of limitations provided by O.C.G.A. § 9-3-22, and the action was therefore time barred. Milhollin v. Salomon Smith
Barney, Inc., 272 Ga. App. 267, 612 S.E.2d 72 (2005). Cited in Shirley v. State, 208 Ga. 614, 68 S.E.2d 597 (1952).
RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. - 27 Am. Jur. 2d, Employment Relationship, § 55 et seq. ALR. - Right of employee to bonus as affected by termination of employment before bonus becomes payable, 28 ALR 346. Corporation’s payment of bonus to officers or employees, 88 ALR 751; 164 ALR 1125. Employee’s or agent’s acceptance of bonus, gratuity, or other personal benefit from one with whom he deals on employer’s or principal’s account as affecting his right to recover wages, salary, or commissions, 102 ALR 1115. Statutes prescribing medium of payment of wages or salary as prohibiting compensation by corporate stock or other interest in business, 137 ALR 846.
Validity, construction, and effect of statutory or contractual provision in, government construction contract referring to Secretary of Labor questions respecting wage rates or classification of employees of contractor, 163 ALR 1300. Validity, construction, and effect of state laws requiring payment of wages on resignation of employee immediately or within specified period, 11 ALR5th 715. Validity, construction, and effect of state laws requiring payment of wages on discharge of employee immediately or within specified period, 18 ALR5th 577. Employer’s liability to employee or agent for injury or death resulting from assault or criminal attack by third person, 40 ALR5th 1.