July 1, 2025 marked one year since the amendments to the Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) took effect. Enacted as a compromise to avoid a proposed November 2024 ballot initiative that would have repealed PAGA, the reforms were the result of negotiations between Governor Newsom, labor groups, and business groups. The stated purpose of the amendments was to curb perceived abuses and restore PAGA’s original mission of supplementing state labor enforcement. However, they continue to spark debate as PAGA case filings remain high and the state pushes back against improper tactics.
1. Background
It is no secret that PAGA had been used by some plaintiffs’ attorneys for years as a tool to pursue claims for civil penalties, often with only a tenuous connection to the named plaintiff. As noted by the Legislature itself, this structure invited manipulation by trial attorneys who saw PAGA as a “money-making scheme” rather than a mechanism to bolster labor law compliance. The Court of Appeal in Williams v. Alacrity Solutions Group, LLC, 110 Cal.App.5th 932, 944 (2024), highlighted this concern, observing that the 2024 amendments were enacted because PAGA’s goal to “bolster labor law enforcement” had been “manipulated over its 20-year history by certain trial attorneys as a money-making scheme.”
2. Mechanics Of The Reform
The 2024 reforms enacted on July 1, 2024, introduced a series of targeted amendments to address these concerns. Among other changes, the legislation:
• Increased the employees’ share of PAGA penalties from 25% to 35%;
• Placed caps on penalties for employers who proactively audit, fix, or cure Labor Code issues, with further reductions if they act after receiving notice;
• Limited standing to plaintiffs who actually suffered the alleged violations within the one-year limitations period;
• Created early resolution and cure processes, including special pathways for small employers and a neutral evaluation process for larger employers; and
• Granted trial courts greater authority to manage overlapping or complex PAGA claims.
3. Trends Since The Reform
The amendments did not discourage attorneys from filing claims in batches. In 2024 alone, over 9,400 notices were filed – an all-time record. Critically, from July 1, 2024 through June 2025, nearly 8,800 more notices were filed, amounting to roughly 25 new filings each day. Many of these notices allege broadly stated Labor Code violations without providing sufficient factual details.
In response, the Labor and Workforce Development Agency (“LWDA”) has issued pointed warnings to several plaintiffs’ firms. For example, in February 2025, the agency directed one firm to amend dozens of notices after finding “numerous boilerplate PAGA notices containing seemingly frivolous allegations.” It warned that a continued pattern could result in State Bar referral. Similarly, in April 2025, the LWDA admonished another firm, observing that out of 102 PAGA notices filed by a single attorney in under a year, nearly all appeared to be copied from class action pleadings with no supporting facts.
These agency warnings reinforce the Legislature’s goal of discouraging “professional PAGA plaintiffs” and their counsel from flooding the courts with cookie-cutter claims. Yet, given the still-elevated filing numbers, it remains to be seen whether these efforts will meaningfully reduce meritless litigation in the long run.
4. Looking Ahead
Even after a year, the full impact of the 2024 PAGA amendments remains uncertain. Many of the new provisions are so complex and poorly drafted, they necessitate interpretations by courts and attorneys alike. Employers are working to understand these reforms and whether they help in defending or narrowing PAGA claims.
At the same time, the LWDA’s unchecked criticism of vague, template-style allegations marks a positive step. Employers should consider how to utilize the agency’s stated concerns about boilerplate notices when challenging litigation filed after the reforms took effect. Courts are also likely to continue testing whether a plaintiff’s “aggrieved employee” status is supported by a timely, individualized claim that the plaintiff suffered each alleged violation. This is consistent with the stricter standing requirements imposed by the amendments.
In this evolving post-reform landscape, proactive compliance measures, thorough audits, and a clear litigation strategy to challenge deficient PAGA claims remain employers’ best tools to minimize exposure.
Those seeking a more in-depth analysis of the new PAGA reform legislation are invited to read the new 2025 California’s Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) Litigation and Compliance Manual by Sheppard Mullin Attorneys Richard J. Simmons, Ryan J. Krueger, and Tyler J. Johnson. Readers can learn to identify high risk areas, audit their policies and practices, understand PAGA litigation, and implement proactive measures to reduce exposure to liability. The Manual will be available soon from Castle Publications.
To read more articles like this one, subscribe to the ALERT Newsletter today!
About The Author
Ryan J. Krueger is a Partner with Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP in the firm’s Los Angeles office. He specializes in labor and employment matters on behalf of employers, including wage and hour violations, employment discrimination, wrongful termination and sexual harassment. Mr. Krueger has experience in all aspects of employment litigation, including brief writing and oral argument, taking and defending depositions, and negotiating settlements. He has also second chaired multiple trials and arbitrations, and argued before the California Court of Appeal. Mr. Krueger also regularly counsels employers regarding California and federal employment law issues.
Ryan is a co-author of the California’s Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) Litigation and Compliance Manual, and is a frequent contributor to the California Labor and Employment ALERT Newsletter. He is a co-speaker at the Castle Publications’ Seminars as well as the Labor Law Update for Sheppard Mullin.
He received his J.D. from the University of California, Los Angeles and his B.A. from the University of Wisconsin, with distinction. During law school, Mr. Krueger served as extern to the Honorable Morton Denlow, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. He is admitted to practice in all California state courts, along with the United States District Court for the Central District of California and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
