Or. Rev. Stat. » Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 652.110

Method of paying employees; agreement on method of payment; revocation of agreement

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      652.110 Method of paying employees; agreement on method of payment; revocation of agreement. (1) A person engaged in any business or enterprise of any kind in this state may not issue, in payment of or as evidence of indebtedness for wages due an employee, any order, check, memorandum or other instrument of indebtedness unless the instrument is negotiable and payable without discount in cash on demand at some bank or other established place of business in the county where the employee lives or works and where a sufficient amount of funds have been provided and are or will be available for the payment of the instrument when due. The person shall, upon presentation and demand, pay the instrument in lawful money of the United States.

      (2) This section does not in any way limit or interfere with the right of any employee to accept from any person, as an evidence or acknowledgment of indebtedness for wages due the employee, a negotiable instrument, payable at some future date with interest.

      (3) An employer may pay wages without discount through direct deposit of wages due to an employee into the employee’s account in a financial institution, as defined in ORS 706.008, in this state.

      (4) An employer shall pay wages due to an employee by check upon the written or oral request of the employee.

      (5) An employer and an employee may agree that the employer may pay wages through an automated teller machine card, payroll card or other means of electronic transfer if the employee may:

      (a) Make an initial withdrawal of the entire amount of net pay without cost to the employee; or

      (b) Choose to use another means of payment of wages that involves no cost to the employee.

      (6) An agreement described in subsection (5) of this section must be made in the language that the employer principally uses to communicate with the employee.

      (7)(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this subsection, to revoke an agreement described in subsection (5) of this section, an employee shall give the employer a written notice of revocation of the agreement. Unless the employer and employee agree otherwise, the agreement is revoked 30 days after the date the notice is received by the employer.

      (b) To revoke an agreement described in subsection (5) of this section, an employee who works for an employer as a seasonal farmworker as defined in ORS 652.145 or an employee who is employed in packing, canning, freezing or drying any variety of agricultural crops shall give the employer notice of revocation of the agreement either orally or in writing. Unless the employer and the employee agree otherwise, the agreement is revoked 10 days after the date the notice is received by the employer.

      (8) Nothing in this section is intended to limit the rights of an employee or otherwise affect an employee covered by a collective bargaining agreement. [Amended by 1975 c.191 §1; 1999 c.59 §191; 2007 c.546 §1; 2013 c.380 §1]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 24 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1955–2024 · leading case: Allen v. County of Jackson
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Allen v. County of Jackson (2000) orctapp · cites it 20× “200(2) authorizes an award of attorney fees in any action for unpaid wages under ORS 652.110 et seq. ORS 652.610(3) prohibits an employer from "withhold[ing], deduct[ing] or divert[ing] any portion of an employee's wages" unless specific circumstances, which are not present in…”
Massachusetts v. Morash (1989) scotus “9 (1986); Ore. Rev. Stat. §§ 652.110 to 652.405 (1987); Pa.”
Pope v. Judicial Department (1986) orctapp · cites it 7× “The legislature enacted the first wage collection statute, which included the precursors of ORS 652.110, ORS 652.140 and ORS 652.200, in 1907.”
Miller v. CC Meisel Co., Inc. (2002) orctapp “Consequently, in light of the policy of ORS 652.110 et seq., we hold that plaintiffs claim for 20 percent of the value of the company as compensation for his efforts to increase the company’s value constitutes a wage claim within the meaning of ORS 652.”
Cavitt v. Employment Division (1990) orctapp · cites it 4× “120 and ORS 652.110 by failing to pay wages with negotiable funds on the regularly established pay day.”
Sprague v. Quality Restaurants Northwest, Inc. (2007) orctapp “According to plaintiff, these facts amounted to violations of ORS 652.110 (checks issued by employers must be negotiable), ORS 652.”
Tracy v. Lane County (1988) or · cites it 2× “The general wage claim statute, ORS 652.110 et seq, on the other hand, provides employes generally with a judicial remedy for nonpayment of wages.”
Gessele v. Jack in the Box, Inc. (2014) ord “610, (7) failed to issue wages in the form required by Oregon Revised Statute § 652.110, and (8) failed to pay all wages when due as required by Oregon Revised Statute § 652.”
Mathis v. St. Helens Auto Ctr., Inc. (2019) orctapp “061(1), particularly because the 48 hours is not tethered in any way to the notice requirement and will almost certainly pass long before the employer knows that an employee is asserting a claim.”
Dosanjh v. Namaste Indian Restaurant, LLC (2015) orctapp “ORS 652.110. "* * * * “Special Jury Instruction No.”
Vento v. Versatile Logic Systems Corp. (2000) orctapp “Plaintiff brought this action under the Oregon wage and hour laws, ORS ORS 652.110 et seq., and the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), 29 USC section 207 , to recover unpaid overtime wages, liquidated damages and penalty wages.”
Stout v. Citicorp Industrial Credit, Inc. (1990) orctapp · cites it 2× “The first part includes ORS 652.110 through ORS 652.250 and is entitled “Payment and Collection of Wages Generally.”
Show all 24 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.