Rhode Island General Laws

R.I. Gen. Laws § 28-14-2 (2026)

Payment of wages — Form of payment — Establishment of regular paydays

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section RI-LEGwebserver.rilegislature.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Every employer shall establish a regular payday on which wages shall be paid in full in lawful money of the United States, or checks on banks convertible into cash on demand at full face value. Each employee must be notified in writing, or by posted notice that may readily be seen by all employees, of a change in the scheduled payday at least three (3) paydays in advance of a scheduled change. Each scheduled payday shall fall within nine (9) days of the end of the payroll period for which wages are computed unless prevented by inevitable casualty; provided, that if the ninth (9th) day is a holiday, payment upon the next business day shall be deemed a compliance with the terms of this section; and provided, further, that if at any time of payment any employee is absent from his or her place of labor, he or she shall be entitled to payment on demand at any time thereafter.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 1975–2020 · leading case: Labor Ready Ne., Inc. v. McConaghy, 849 A.2d 340 (R.I. 2004).
Labor Ready Ne., Inc. v. McConaghy, 849 A.2d 340 (R.I. 2004). · cites it 4× “Finally, the department suggests, even if we excluded Labor Ready’s vouchers from the scope of § 19-14-1, its voucher system, under which workers must pay a small fee to obtain cash wages from the CDM, violated G.L.1956 § 28-14-2, which requires employers to pay wages in full to…”
Mello v. DaLomba, 798 A.2d 405 (R.I. 2002). · cites it 6× “Also included in count 3 are plaintiffs assertions that defendants faded to pay him fringe benefit wages on two federal jobs in violation of G.L.1956 § 28-14-2. The trial justice did not address plaintiffs claim under § 28-14-2, although he clearly entered judgment for…”
State v. Carpenter, 412 A.2d 285 (Vt. 1980). “R.I. Gen. Laws § 28-14-2 (1968 Reenactment) is not truly a strict liability wage payment statute.”
State v. Feist, 341 A.2d 725 (R.I. 1975). · cites it 2× “1956 (1968 Reenactment) §24-14-17 providing for the imprisonment of an employer convicted of failure to pay according to the terms of §28-14-2 is imprisonment for debt in violation of art.”
Ryder v. Pearson Educ., Inc. (D.R.I. 2020). “1, § 28-14-1 and § 28-14-2. ECF No. 23 at 14-15, ¶¶ 110-16.”
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.