ARTICLE
20 February 2019

California Supreme Court: Payroll Companies Not Liable To Client's Employees For Unpaid Wages

B
BakerHostetler

Contributor

BakerHostetler logo
Recognized as one of the top firms for client service, BakerHostetler is a leading national law firm that helps clients around the world address their most complex and critical business and regulatory issues. With five core national practice groups — Business, Labor and Employment, Intellectual Property, Litigation, and Tax — the firm has more than 970 lawyers located in 14 offices coast to coast. BakerHostetler is widely regarded as having one of the country’s top 10 tax practices, a nationally recognized litigation practice, an award-winning data privacy practice and an industry-leading business practice. The firm is also recognized internationally for its groundbreaking work recovering more than $13 billion in the Madoff Recovery Initiative, representing the SIPA Trustee for the liquidation of Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC. Visit bakerlaw.com
The California Supreme Court has cut off another avenue for employees to sue payroll provider companies for unpaid wages.
United States Employment and HR

The California Supreme Court has cut off another avenue for employees to sue payroll provider companies for unpaid wages. California courts have previously found that employees cannot sue a payroll company under a theory that the company is the "employer." In a new decision, the California Supreme Court held that employees cannot sue payroll companies for unpaid wages under theories that the employee is a third-party beneficiary of the contract between the employer and the payroll company or that the payroll company acted negligently in not paying the employee the wages owed.

In reaching this conclusion, the court reasoned that employees are not third-party beneficiaries of contracts between the payroll company and the employer because the primary purpose of these agreements is to benefit the employer, not the employee: "Instead, the relevant motivating purpose is to provide a benefit to the employer, with regard to the cost and efficiency of the tasks performed and the avoidance of potential penalties."

As to the employee's negligence theory of liability, the court concluded the payroll company owed the employee no duty of care. The court noted that the employee can sue her employer, and that the "payroll company presumably will be liable to the employer if the payroll company's negligence in failing to comply with the applicable labor statutes or wage orders results in the employer being held liable in a suit brought by an employee against the employer."

The bottom line:

A California employee cannot recover unpaid wages from the payroll company utilized by the employer; the employee's recourse is against the actual employer.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More