by Jaimee Wellerstein
California’s PAGA reform effort is still unfolding. On February 6, the Labor and Workforce Development Agency (LWDA) released proposed regulations designed to implement the sweeping statutory changes enacted in 2024. You can view the regulations here.
While the reforms were billed as a way to curb litigation abuse, these regulations are largely procedural. They focus on how PAGA (Private Attorney General Act) notices are filed, investigated, cured, and settled — not whether fewer cases will be brought.
For employers, especially in high-exposure industries like private security, the message is straightforward: expect more administrative structure, but not necessarily less risk.
The public comment period remains open through March 23, 2026. A public hearing will only occur if requested by that same deadline.
Quick Refresher: What Is PAGA?
Enacted in 2004, PAGA allows “aggrieved employees” to pursue civil penalties on behalf of the State of California for alleged Labor Code violations. Seventy-five percent of any recovery goes to the State, with the remaining 25% distributed among affected employees.
Although it often feels like a class action, PAGA is technically different. It is a representative enforcement action brought in the State’s name — but one employee still seeks penalties on behalf of all other “aggrieved” employees, whether they want to participate or not.
Those employees are generally bound by the outcome and cannot opt out.
That structure is exactly why PAGA has become such a powerful enforcement tool — even after the 2024 reforms narrowed standing, penalties, and cure opportunities.
A More Structured Administrative Process
The regulations push toward mandatory electronic filing through the Department of Industrial Relations portal. Notices, employer responses, cure submissions, and supporting documents would all flow through a centralized system.
The $75 filing fee remains, and personal identifiers must be redacted. The goal is uniformity, tracking, and a cleaner administrative record.
Cracking Down on Boilerplate Notices
One of the LWDA’s clearest targets is the use of template exhaustion notices.
Under the proposal, claimants would have to provide detailed, employee-specific information — job titles, work locations, employment dates, duties, and factual statements supporting each alleged violation. Generalized statutory recitations would no longer suffice.
For multi-site employers like security companies, this could help narrow broad, speculative filings untethered to any specific post, supervisor, or practice.
High-Frequency and Vexatious Filers
The regulations also take aim at volume filers.
Attorneys submitting more than 200 PAGA notices annually would be labeled “high-frequency filers” and subject to additional certification requirements. Repeat noncompliant filers could face pre-filing review.
Practically speaking, this targets a small group of firms responsible for a disproportionate share of PAGA filings.
Cure Procedures — More Defined
The proposal adds helpful structure to cure provisions, particularly for employers with fewer than 100 employees.
It clarifies how headcount is calculated, which violations are eligible, how cures must be submitted, and how employees may challenge them. Cure communications would remain confidential.
For employers that can quickly fix technical issues — wage statements, payroll formatting, or similar defects — this creates a clearer path to contain exposure early.
Settlement Oversight — And New Complications
Settlement review would expand significantly. The LWDA would require more documentation and take at least 45 days to evaluate proposed settlements. Claimants would also be barred from adding new violations once settlement is submitted.
But the most impactful change is this: settling plaintiffs would have to notify other employees who filed PAGA notices against the same employer and give them an opportunity to comment.
In practice, this creates a coordinated settlement process that could complicate global resolutions — potentially forcing employers to negotiate with multiple claimants at once.
Why This Matters for Security Employers
Private security remains a prime PAGA target. 24/7 operations, solo posts, mobile patrol, client-directed worksites, and complex scheduling create fertile ground for meal-period, rest-break, timekeeping, and wage-statement claims.
More detailed notices may help narrow weak filings, and expanded cure rights may create early off-ramps. But heightened settlement scrutiny — particularly around meal periods, patrol time, and pay practices — will increase compliance pressure.
Employer Takeaway on the next phase of California's PAGA Reform
These proposed regulations mark the next phase of PAGA reform: tighter filing requirements, clearer cure pathways, and deeper settlement oversight.
Employers have the opportunity to submit written comments through March 23, 2026. A public hearing will only occur if requested by that deadline.
If you comment on anything, focus on the coordinated settlement requirement. Forcing employers to notify and involve other PAGA filers risks complicating, delaying, and multiplying settlements rather than streamlining them. It may make global resolution significantly harder while offering little practical benefit.
As always, proactive wage-and-hour compliance, clean documentation, and audit-ready payroll practices remain the strongest defenses in California’s evolving enforcement landscape.
If you have questions about how these developments affect your business, your attorneys at Bradley + Wellerstein LLP are here to help.
Jaimee K. Wellerstein is a Co-managing Partner, representing employers across all aspects of employment law. She works closely with clients to develop proactive strategies to prevent workplace disputes, provides legal counsel and training for management and employees, and conducts internal compliance audits. Ms. Wellerstein also leads investigations into employee allegations and, when necessary, aggressively defends clients in state and federal courts, administrative hearings, arbitrations, and mediations. A skilled litigator and negotiator, she is also a frequent speaker on employment and contract law. Get in touch with Jaimee