iv Litigating CA Wage & Hour Class and PAGA Actions (24th Edition) Seyfarth Shaw LLP | www.seyfarth.com 2. Commissions and Production-Based Incentives ..........................................95 3. Salary ...........................................................................................................95 4. Flat-Sum Bonuses ........................................................................................96 XIII. California Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act........................................... 97 A. General Scope of the Law ..........................................................................................97 B. 2024 Reforms— Enactment of “New PAGA” .............................................................. 99 C. Requirement to Exhaust Administrative Remedies ..................................................100 C. Scope of the “Civil Penalty” Provisions ..................................................................... 103 D. Pursuing PAGA Claims Collectively Without Class Certification ............................................................................................................... 106 E. Whether PAGA Claims Can Be Stricken Or Otherwise Limited As Unmanageable ....................................................................................................107 F. Release of PAGA Claims Through Class Settlement ...............................................110 G. Wage Order Claims ..................................................................................................112 H. Class-Like Discovery for PAGA Claims ....................................................................114 XIV. Unfair Competition Claims, Business & Professions Code Section 17200 ....... 117 A. Former Law—Pre-Proposition 64 .............................................................................117 B. Reform of the Law—Passage of Proposition 64.......................................................118 C. Proposition 64’s Restrictions on UCL Class Actions ................................................ 119 D. Federal Courts Lack Jurisdiction Over UCL Claims For Restitution When There Is An Adequate Remedy At Law ........................................120 XV. Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 ........................................................................ 123 A. The Purpose of the Act .............................................................................................123 B. General Requirements .............................................................................................123 C. Removal Under CAFA ..............................................................................................124 1. The Timeliness Requirement For A CAFA Removal .....................................................................................................124 2. Premature Removal and Sanctions............................................................125 3. Establishing The “Amount In Controversy” In A CAFA Removal ........................................................................................... 125 4. The Amount In Controversy Does Not Include Non-Class Action Claims............................................................................128 D. Exceptions to CAFA Jurisdiction ..............................................................................128 1. Local Controversy Exception......................................................................128 2. Home State Exception................................................................................129
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTkwMTQ4