Republish
How a California law helps Peruvian sheepherders, dairy workers, janitors and the state itself
We love that you want to share our stories with your readers. Hundreds of publications republish our work on a regular basis.
All of the articles at CalMatters are available to republish for free, under the following conditions:
-
- Give prominent credit to our journalists: Credit our authors at the top of the article and any other byline areas of your publication. In the byline, we prefer “By Author Name, CalMatters.” If you’re republishing guest commentary (example) from CalMatters, in the byline, use “By Author Name, Special for CalMatters.”
-
- Credit CalMatters at the top of the story: At the top of the story’s text, include this copy: “This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.” If you are republishing commentary, include this copy instead: “This commentary was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.” If you’re republishing in print, omit the second sentence on newsletter signups.
-
- Do not edit the article, including the headline, except to reflect relative changes in time, location and editorial style. For example, “yesterday” can be changed to “last week,” and “Alameda County” to “Alameda County, California” or “here.”
-
- If you add reporting that would help localize the article, include this copy in your story: “Additional reporting by [Your Publication]” and let us know at republish@calmatters.org.
-
- If you wish to translate the article, please contact us for approval at republish@calmatters.org.
-
- Photos and illustrations by CalMatters staff or shown as “for CalMatters” may only be republished alongside the stories in which they originally appeared. For any other uses, please contact us for approval at visuals@calmatters.org.
-
- Photos and illustrations from wire services like the Associated Press, Reuters, iStock are not free to republish.
-
- Do not sell our stories, and do not sell ads specifically against our stories. Feel free, however, to publish it on a page surrounded by ads you’ve already sold.
-
- Sharing a CalMatters story on social media? Please mention @CalMatters. We’re on X, Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and BlueSky.
If you’d like to regularly republish our stories, we have some other options available. Contact us at republish@calmatters.org if you’re interested.
Have other questions or special requests? Or do you have a great story to share about the impact of one of our stories on your audience? We’d love to hear from you. Contact us at republish@calmatters.org.
How a California law helps Peruvian sheepherders, dairy workers, janitors and the state itself
Share this:
By Cynthia Rice, Special to CalMatters
Cynthia L. Rice is a former board member of the California Employment Lawyers Association and is director of litigation, advocacy & training for California Rural Legal Assistance, crice@crla.org. She wrote this commentary for CalMatters.
Have you ever had a job where you didn’t know the name of your employer or where to go if you didn’t get your check?
Ever had to work on your feet for 10 hours because your boss figured it was cheaper not to provide seats?
Ever get a paycheck that was $100 less than you expected because you were charged for tools needed for work?
Ever work in a field for six straight hours in 90-degree heat with no breaks, no shade, no restroom?
These are everyday occurrences for the low wage workers who bring lawsuits under the Private Attorneys General Act, also known as PAGA, a law whose impact is examined in a new report issued by a coalition including the UCLA Labor Center.
These are the PAGA cases that employers and organizations such as the California Chamber of Commerce decry as “job killers” or “bounty hunter” cases. In reality, individual workers who pursue these cases seek not only the wages and penalties they are owed, but penalties owed to other workers and the state of California.
The Private Attorneys General Act law was passed to address documented widespread worker exploitation. The California Legislature recognized that the state had, and still has, limited resources to enforce critical labor law protections.
Enforcement was expanded by allowing workers who had suffered violations to bring a lawsuit on their own behalf, and others, to enforce the penalties owed by employers who violate these laws. The UCLA Labor Center report demonstrates the effectiveness of the law and profiles worker abuses.
Here are a few more:
Once here, they were put to work part of the year in a haying operation, working 10 to 12 hours, but never paid the minimum wage or overtime owed to them for the non-sheepherding work. The employer felt “safe” from lawsuits because the herders could only work for him under their visa, and had to return to Peru if they stopped working.
When plaintiff Ronal Vilcapoma was told he could either file a Labor Commissioner claim for himself, and get his money in several months, or bring a lawsuit, which would take years but recover wages and penalties for other workers, he chose to help his fellow workers and make sure that others would not suffer the same treatment. His lawsuit put from $500 to $18,000 in workers’ pockets and sent thousands to the California Labor and Workforce Development Agency.
Private Attorneys General Act actions were brought against dozens of dairy farms that paid a flat salary with no compensation for overtime, gave no breaks, kept no time records, and made workers buy their own protective gear.
Cases by janitors, workers in hotels, restaurants, nurseries, nursing homes and every low-wage job imaginable have been successfully brought under the Private Attorneys General Act statute with comparable results.
Plaintiffs waited years instead of months for their wages and penalties so that the others in their workplace could benefit. These recoveries are not windfalls. They are enforcement actions that offset the economic advantage law-breaking employers gain over law-abiding employers.
But the ultimate, unheralded impact of these cases is the effect on the sued employers and the industries they profit from.
In case after case, plaintiffs return to report that the sued employer and other employers in the area have changed and are now giving breaks, paying for travel time, providing seats or shade or restrooms and paying all the wages owed without illegal deductions.
The statute is working, compliance is increasing, and workers and the state are benefiting.
____
Cynthia L. Rice is a former board member of the California Employment Lawyers Association and is director of litigation, advocacy & training for California Rural Legal Assistance, crice@crla.org. She wrote this commentary for CalMatters.